# Gatwick Airport: Drone sightings cause delays



## Robster59 (Dec 20, 2018)

I think it's about time Drones were licenced as they are too easily purchased and can be used by anyone, anywhere.  I can see situations like this on the increase as brain-dead idiots think the law doesn't apply to them or think it's just fun to cause massive disruption.
I've nothing against drones per se as they provide some excellent footage but the potential damage that can be caused if one hits a plane is frightening and I think we are getting to a state of "when" rather than "if".

Gatwick Airport: Drone sightings cause delays

Stansted Airport: Drone 'missed landing plane by 15m'


----------



## Dasit (Dec 20, 2018)

Does anyone know if shooting them out the sky would be possible?

Could a person with say a sniper rifle, hit these things when they are moving?


It must be almost impossible to catch people operating these drones, as you can do it from a long distance.


----------



## LIG (Dec 20, 2018)

Whilst I agree licensing is best for the future, far too many have already got into brain-dead idiots' hands to make sure aircraft remain safe in the air - the idiots still need to be caught! 
Even the small kids toy versions are a danger to aircraft!


----------



## Imurg (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			Does anyone know if shooting them out the sky would be possible?

Could a person with say a sniper rifle, hit these things when they are moving?


It must be almost impossible to catch people operating these drones, as you can do it from a long distance.
		
Click to expand...

My concern, at somewhere like Gatwick, is where the bullet comes down if you miss....


----------



## LIG (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			Does anyone know if shooting them out the sky would be possible?

Could a person with say a sniper rifle, hit these things when they are moving?


It must be almost impossible to catch people operating these drones, as you can do it from a long distance.
		
Click to expand...

Shooting with a rifle surely presents even more danger, what with uncontrolled descents, not to mention the bullet itself if it missed it's target!


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			Could a person with say a sniper rifle, hit these things when they are moving?.
		
Click to expand...

Not a great idea to have things indiscriminately dropping out of the sky.

Flight time of a drone roughly 20 min due to battery life. A very short time to spot a small object in the air, track it and do something about it.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

Imurg said:



			My concern, at somewhere like Gatwick, is where the bullet comes down if you miss....
		
Click to expand...

Yep, what goes up must come down.

The few are going to spoil it for the many in the end.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

No flights before 1600 hrs


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 20, 2018)

This is worrying.  Will we see _Starstreak MANPADS _being deployed at major airports to counter this threat?  Expensive...


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

My flight has been cancelled. Nice start to the holiday.


----------



## Wabinez (Dec 20, 2018)

Definitely need 'Hunter' drones....or something like a mini-EMP to kill electrics and make them drop out of the air.


----------



## Grant85 (Dec 20, 2018)

Robster59 said:



			I think it's about time Drones were licenced as they are too easily purchased and can be used by anyone, anywhere.  I can see situations like this on the increase as brain-dead idiots think the law doesn't apply to them or think it's just fun to cause massive disruption.
I've nothing against drones per se as they provide some excellent footage but the potential damage that can be caused if one hits a plane is frightening and I think we are getting to a state of "when" rather than "if".

Gatwick Airport: Drone sightings cause delays

Stansted Airport: Drone 'missed landing plane by 15m'

Click to expand...

It sounds like in this case, people are maliciously flying them to disrupt air travel.

Not certain how much licensing would stop this kind of thing if people are intent on breaking what laws are already in place.

As is often the case, things that government can do, or feel the need to do to be seen to be doing something, tends to disrupt or add costs for the law abiding citizen and might make it slightly easier for police to track down perpetrators in some circumstances.


----------



## IanM (Dec 20, 2018)

Shoot them down... job done.  Better one of those falling out of the sky than a plane full of people.  

Lots of bored Police Firearms Officers would love a bit of fun with these!


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

IanM said:



			Shoot them down... job done.  Better one of those falling out of the sky than a plane full of people.

Lots of bored Police Firearms Officers would love a bit of fun with these!
		
Click to expand...

Which due you suggest they use , the Glock or the H&K


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 20, 2018)

Is this akin to a terrorist action?  Without doubt it has created increased fear amongst some fliers.


----------



## Dibby (Dec 20, 2018)

The problem with licensing is it has a huge impact on innocents, like people whose hobby is flying radio control planes. Historically these have been complex to build and fly and so due to the learning curve were not so easily found in the hands of idiots who abused them. Unfortunately, the advancement of technology has likely spoiled a hobby for serious aero-modellers.


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

I can't see licensing as the answer. It's like giving someone a driving license. They can still drive like an idiot.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

Dibby said:



			The problem with licensing is it has a huge impact on innocents, like people whose hobby is flying radio control planes. Historically these have been complex to build and fly and so due to the learning curve were not so easily found in the hands of idiots who abused them. Unfortunately, the advancement of technology has likely spoiled a hobby for serious aero-modellers.
		
Click to expand...

Surley the innocent won't mind the licensing issue. All amateur radio hams had to.


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

How do you police it though? I was looking a a small indoor drone for less than Â£20. Or an out door one for less than Â£80. The one being used at Gatwick is apparently a commercial drone, not a toy, so an expensive one.


----------



## Dasit (Dec 20, 2018)

Some people are saying battery last 20 minutes.

So why is the airport closed for 12 hours today?


Might sound like I have tinfoil hat on, but there must be something more sinister happening there today


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 20, 2018)

Does every drone have a specific frequency it operates on?  I'm thinking they can't all operate on the same frequencies else multiple drones in one area could be uncontrollable.  If they each operate to a specific frequency that could be the finger print / signature for the drone.  If you can pick up the frequency a rogue drone is operating on could you jam it?  Or if the operating frequency of every drone is registered at point of sale could they be traced back to the purchaser?  Dunno.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 20, 2018)

Got to look at the bigger picture here.
After hours no one has been caught,imagine one of these used as a missile with a small bomb on.
Whoeverâ€™s is doing this needs a good jail sentence.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			Some people are saying battery last 20 minutes.

So why is the airport closed for 12 hours today?


Might sound like I have tinfoil hat on, but there must be something more sinister happening there today
		
Click to expand...

Itâ€™s going up for an hour or so then disappearing,maybe to get a new battery,so I suppose it must be close ish


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 20, 2018)

It all comes down to the what the drone was actually doing what sort of drone and where it was - they have their protocol and I would expect a closure like this would mean itâ€™s got very close to some aircraft and itâ€™s beyond being a social drone.


----------



## need_my_wedge (Dec 20, 2018)

pokerjoke said:



			Itâ€™s going up for an hour or so then disappearing,maybe to get a new battery,so I suppose it must be close ish
		
Click to expand...

So someone is continuously and intentionally "attacking" the airport? There must be a way that these can be tracked?


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)

I fly a couple of drones for personal use as part of a photography/videography hobby. 

The first issue is that of licensing, I don't think this will have much effect on these types of incidents as the law/rule abiding hobbyists will happily register their drones/get licensed. It will not stop those who are happy to operate outside of these areas. A bit like driving a car, there will always be those happy to drive without tax, insurance and/or a license. 

These types of incidents have a huge affect on us 'normal' users who keep to the rules as drones/drone users are being tarred with the same brush i.e. perverts looking to spy and those looking to cause disruption. When I first started flying most of the comments I had were ones of interest and people wanted to see what was on the screen. Now there is a lot more suspicion around it and the negative comments are definitely on the increase, it's a shame as the minority (as in all walks of life) are spoiling it for the majority. 

In terms of the drones involved at Gatwick, the consumer/prosumer drones have a battery life of 16-25 minutes, that is based on the couple that I have. Obviously you can have multiple batteries however it does take a little time to get a drone out of the sky, change the battery and then get it up again. My drones are geo-fenced so they cannot fly around an airport so the ones being used here have either been hacked or are custom built. Either that or they are toy level without any GPS however that seems unlikely to me. What I don't understand about this incident is how the police seem incapable to tracking the drone if it keeps popping up. There was a recent incident where a police helicopter followed a drone back to a garden and the operator was arrested. It seems to be a little odd that they cannot do similar here. 

What I think it does highlight is how unprepared airports are and possibly haven't taken drones seriously on the basis of them being used in either a terrorist attack or simply a protest/disruption type event that appears to be happening today. Shooting a drone out of the air is not an option, they move quickly in different directions and any miss could have potentially catastrophic results. There is plenty of technology out there that the airports should have in place to ensure that any drone incursion be it intentional or accidental it would be sorted with minimal effort and little knock on effects to passengers.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Dec 20, 2018)

R2R - Interesting post. I was sat next to a man on a course recently who ran commercial drones. He did a lot of work for developers, land owners, farmers etc. He also said in the beginning people stopped him for a chat out of curiosity. Now they get a little hostile believing he is spying on them. A change in the perception of drones and unfair on the professionals out there using them.


----------



## larmen (Dec 20, 2018)

What I donâ€™t get is why it is Gatwick only. If there is a rest threat anyonevwishing harm with a drone could easily get to Heathrow in an hour, why isnâ€™t that closed as well? And others.

Btw, a German football scout has been caught on Tuesday flying a drone over an opposition training ground. They are not totally untraceable.
(We still didnâ€™t get the 3points)


----------



## Coffey (Dec 20, 2018)

It is pretty unbelievable how much carnage one drone (or two) could cause. It seems insane to me that someone could basically shut down all flights in London with 4 drones.


----------



## MegaSteve (Dec 20, 2018)

larmen said:



			What I donâ€™t get is why it is Gatwick only. If there is a rest threat anyonevwishing harm with a drone could easily get to Heathrow in an hour, why isnâ€™t that closed as well? And others.
		
Click to expand...

Guessing with a single runway Gatwick is an easier target to disrupt...


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 20, 2018)

7pm now 
Poor people travelling,gutted for them.
Military being asked to help


----------



## Dasit (Dec 20, 2018)

What the hell is really happening

This has to be much bigger than just a drone


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

Yes, I am really glad I didn't get as far as checking in. Once in the airport, you are jiggered, especially those who have gone through security.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			What the hell is really happening

This has to be much bigger than just a drone
		
Click to expand...

Or they are bringing in guys with specialist equipment designed to help track the signals- my mate is part of a team on its way


----------



## Dasit (Dec 20, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Or they are bringing in guys with specialist equipment designed to help track the signals- my mate is part of a team on its way
		
Click to expand...

OK mate keep us updated.

I am flying tomorrow from Gatwick so watching all this closely


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 20, 2018)

Don't know why we are faffing about with this, sub up the Thames and a Trident missile, sorted mate.
Isn't that why we spend Â£trillions on it, to defend our country against a Â£200 toy.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)




----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 20, 2018)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075777515434631169


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 20, 2018)

road2ruin said:



View attachment 26181

Click to expand...

You could be weirdly right with that one....controlled from a sight in Fife perhaps.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

What a toe rag. Hopefully some goes and feels his collar


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 20, 2018)

road2ruin said:



View attachment 26181

Click to expand...


Can't possibly be her; we've seen her "dancing" in South Africa, no way she's got enough coordination to fly one of these...


----------



## need_my_wedge (Dec 20, 2018)

Was listening to Radio 4 news earlier. Apparently there are a number of ways to control them aside from normal remote control. They can have a pre-programmed route in them that doesnâ€™t require a remote control, only GPS. Or they can be remote controlled via phone on 4G, and you donâ€™t even need to be in the country to do that. I donâ€™t know much about them, I donâ€™t know if itâ€™s scaremongering, but it is worrying that whoever is doing this can bring it all to a standstill like this. Hope it gets sorted soon as my mum is supposed to be flying from Gatwick tomorrow.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

need_my_wedge said:



			Was listening to Radio 4 news earlier. Apparently there are a number of ways to control them aside from normal remote control. They can have a pre-programmed route in them that doesnâ€™t require a remote control, only GPS. Or they can be remote controlled via phone on 4G, and you donâ€™t even need to be in the country to do that. I donâ€™t know much about them, I donâ€™t know if itâ€™s scaremongering, but it is worrying that whoever is doing this can bring it all to a standstill like this. Hope it gets sorted soon as my mum is supposed to be flying from Gatwick tomorrow.
		
Click to expand...

Loads of AC in the wrong place. Even if they sort it tonight in the dark there would I expect be massive further delays tomorrow.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 20, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



			Can't possibly be her; we've seen her "dancing" in South Africa, no way she's got enough coordination to fly one of these... 

Click to expand...

She does drone on a bit though...

Asides aside - authorities should throw a very big book at whoever is responsible - IMO should be deemed an act of terrorism


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)

need_my_wedge said:



			Was listening to Radio 4 news earlier. Apparently there are a number of ways to control them aside from normal remote control. They can have a pre-programmed route in them that doesnâ€™t require a remote control, only GPS. Or they can be remote controlled via phone on 4G, and you donâ€™t even need to be in the country to do that. I donâ€™t know much about them, I donâ€™t know if itâ€™s scaremongering, but it is worrying that whoever is doing this can bring it all to a standstill like this. Hope it gets sorted soon as my mum is supposed to be flying from Gatwick tomorrow.
		
Click to expand...

You can indeed control from further afield however there are still battery limitations so there has to be at least one person on the ground sorting that side of things out.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 20, 2018)

Fry the electronics so the things crash and burn. Then catch the perps and sue them for everyones losses and damages.....feckers


----------



## adam6177 (Dec 20, 2018)

Am due to fly back to Gatwick tomorrow.... Due to land at 6:30pm from Tenerife. Who knows what tomorrow holds for me.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			Who knows what tomorrow holds for me.
		
Click to expand...

An additional day (or two) in Tenerife....


----------



## adam6177 (Dec 20, 2018)

road2ruin said:



			An additional day (or two) in Tenerife....
		
Click to expand...

Well that would be nice, I'm not normally that lucky.


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

road2ruin said:



			An additional day (or two) in Tenerife....
		
Click to expand...

Or, a flight to Stockholm. No nearer, particularly, but somewhere different


----------



## rosecott (Dec 20, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			Am due to fly back to Gatwick tomorrow.... Due to land at 6:30pm from Tenerife. Who knows what tomorrow holds for me.
		
Click to expand...

Starting to get jittery now - am just packing my summer golf shoes for a flight to Bermuda on Sunday from Gatwick!


----------



## adam6177 (Dec 20, 2018)

rosecott said:



			Starting to get jittery now - am just packing my summer golf shoes for a flight to Bermuda on Sunday from Gatwick!
		
Click to expand...

I'd imagine you'll be ok by Sunday. Any chance of changing airport?


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

I see the police are calling in military help and hopefully they can put an end to this. I would think there has to be more than one person involved for it to have carried on all day and no-one has been spotted but it's a little disconcerting that this can drag on and on. I am sure once the matter is resolved they are going to face a lengthy jail term although isn't the maximum sentence only five years at the moment????


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 20, 2018)

Yep, a possible 5k fine, and may be up to 5 years in the clink.

In reality, 4.50 payable once a year for eternity, and 3 days, suspended.

No deterent at all.


----------



## IainP (Dec 20, 2018)

In times like this, nothing like a bit of wild speculation. 
How about, jilted lover - ex partner due to jet off on hols with new squeeze. Thinks I'll put a stop to that.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

IainP said:



			In times like this, nothing like a bit of wild speculation.
How about, jilted lover - ex partner due to jet off on hols with new squeeze. Thinks I'll put a stop to that.
		
Click to expand...

Bit OTT and to keep it going all day???


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 20, 2018)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Bit OTT and to keep it going all day???
		
Click to expand...

Maybe that's why she left him for the new squeeze because he can "keep it going all day".


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 20, 2018)




----------



## adam6177 (Dec 20, 2018)

I've just seen that the plane that would leave Gatwick tomorrow for us to come home on has no departure scheduled.... Looks like I'm in for a long day.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Dec 20, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			I've just seen that the plane that would leave Gatwick tomorrow for us to come home on has no departure scheduled.... Looks like I'm in for a long day.
		
Click to expand...

I've had a couple of delays this year, it's a right PITA. Hope it isn't too bad for you  

I'm due to fly out of Standstead next Saturday, I'm not worried............yet!!


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 20, 2018)

Dasit said:



			Does anyone know if shooting them out the sky would be possible?

Could a person with say a sniper rifle, hit these things when they are moving?


It must be almost impossible to catch people operating these drones, as you can do it from a long distance.
		
Click to expand...

If you shoot a bullet at them it has to land somewhere!
In an airport this is a no no.

But something needs to be done.
Maybe a five year sentence may send a message.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 20, 2018)

rosecott said:



			Starting to get jittery now - am just packing my summer golf shoes for a flight to Bermuda on Sunday from Gatwick!
		
Click to expand...

Got any courses booked Jim?


----------



## woofers (Dec 20, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			If you shoot a bullet at them it has to land somewhere!
In an airport this is a no no.

But something needs to be done.
Maybe a five year sentence may send a message.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but I understood that for these things to be a danger to aircraft they are likely to be out on the airfield, (e.g. in the proximity of the runway, the landing thresholds,  take off zones etc), not in the airport terminal areas. The airfield is a massive open space with plenty of room for a stray shot should it miss the flying object. Why should a bullet be used anyway? It just needs to be something that disables and brings down the drone. Bullets aren't used in clay pigeon shooting and although a lot more technical and advanced, at face value the drone situation is an enhanced version of this. Which leads me to suggest there is more to this than is currently being reported.


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 20, 2018)

Hard to believe there is no footage of these things buzzing about from either the media or stranded passengers via social media.  

Unless I am missing something. Strange story this.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

garyinderry said:



			Hard to believe there is no footage of these things buzzing about from either the media or stranded passengers via social media. 

Unless I am missing something. Strange story this.
		
Click to expand...

If it is dangerous to be in the air space around Gatwick how do you think the footage could be achieved. Media helicopters would be banned from the area and I doubt the police would be happy with large groups of journalists hanging around the perimeter making their jobs harder.


----------



## IainP (Dec 20, 2018)

Thought the Mail had some footage


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 20, 2018)

woofers said:



			Yes, but I understood that for these things to be a danger to aircraft they are likely to be out on the airfield, (e.g. in the proximity of the runway, the landing thresholds,  take off zones etc), not in the airport terminal areas. The airfield is a massive open space with plenty of room for a stray shot should it miss the flying object. Why should a bullet be used anyway? It just needs to be something that disables and brings down the drone. Bullets aren't used in clay pigeon shooting and although a lot more technical and advanced, at face value the drone situation is an enhanced version of this. Which leads me to suggest there is more to this than is currently being reported.
		
Click to expand...

Any stray metal on a runway can be thrown up by the front wheel of a plane and hit an engine or wing and disaster.
This is what happened to Concorde when it crashed a bit of stray metal that wasnâ€™t spotted of another aircraft .

Just seen on the local news they have trained birds of prey to bring them down that would be a good result.
Not sure if a commercial one is to big though.


----------



## garyinderry (Dec 20, 2018)

Old Skier said:



			If it is dangerous to be in the air space around Gatwick how do you think the footage could be achieved. Media helicopters would be banned from the area and I doubt the police would be happy with large groups of journalists hanging around the perimeter making their jobs harder.
		
Click to expand...


There's 1000s of people with phones in their pockets.  Travellers and employees. There should be loads of amateur footage.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Just seen on the local news they have trained birds of prey to bring them down that would be a good result.
Not sure if a commercial one is to big though.
		
Click to expand...

Only on a trial basis in the Netherlands according to the BBC news.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

Old Skier said:



			If it is dangerous to be in the air space around Gatwick how do you think the footage could be achieved. Media helicopters would be banned from the area and I doubt the police would be happy with large groups of journalists hanging around the perimeter making their jobs harder.
		
Click to expand...

Can't understand how the operators haven't been spotted. Surely they would have to be in the vicinity of the perimeter fence.. It's definitely an unusual situation and hopefully the military intervention will bring it to a conclusion. The knock on effect though is going to take several days to sort. I can't see any motive that justifies potentially ruining Christmas for so many people


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 20, 2018)

There was a guy on the ITV news earlier saying there is signal blocking devices available. He reckoned 2 devices would be enough to protect Gatwick and 3 would be enough to protect Heathrow. But seemingly the law would need to be changed to allow them to be used.


----------



## Imurg (Dec 20, 2018)

I really do wonder if there's more to this than meets the eye.
Maybe there's a hijacked plane or terrorist threat and negotiations are taking place. They put the drone excuse out as they thought it would over quickly and can't retract it now it's dragging on.
Hope it's not but I'm struggling to believe that they can't sort this - Gatwick have said nobody should come to the airport for the foreseeable future including tomorrow....
A thicker plot than a drone methinks....


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

garyinderry said:



			There's 1000s of people with phones in their pockets.  Travellers and employees. There should be loads of amateur footage.
		
Click to expand...

Would have to be some phone to get something flying around up to 1/4 mile away at several hundred feet.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

Imurg said:



			I really do wonder if there's more to this than meets the eye.
Maybe there's a hijacked plane or terrorist threat and negotiations are taking place. They put the drone excuse out as they thought it would over quickly and can't retract it now it's dragging on.
Hope it's not but I'm struggling to believe that they can't sort this - Gatwick have said nobody should come to the airport for the foreseeable future including tomorrow....
A thicker plot than a drone methinks....
		
Click to expand...

A full airport and Gatwick telling people to stay away as no planes are moving. Surley if the airport is at more than capacity and nothing's flying they don't want even more people there.

If there had been a more sinister event the QRF would have rocked up and I doubt anyone would miss seeing them.


----------



## Imurg (Dec 20, 2018)

Old Skier said:



			A full airport and Gatwick telling people to stay away as no planes are moving. Surley if the airport is at more than capacity and nothing's flying they don't want even more people there.

If there had been a more sinister event the QRF would have rocked up and I doubt anyone would miss seeing them.
		
Click to expand...

Just a wandering mind as much as anything else.
I just find it hard to believe that Gatwick has been at a standstill for 24 hours. If these drones have power for 30 minutes that's a hell of a lot of take offs, landings and battery charging going on.. Gatwick big but it ain't that big.
And if it really is all down to a drone then, quite frankly, it's pathetic that they haven't sorted it in 24 hours


----------



## drdel (Dec 20, 2018)

Do you really think the Army and police are going tell everyone about their technology and tactics: they are not in the education business!!!!


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Just a wandering mind as much as anything else.
I just find it hard to believe that Gatwick has been at a standstill for 24 hours. If these drones have power for 30 minutes that's a hell of a lot of take offs, landings and battery charging going on.. Gatwick big but it ain't that big.
And if it really is all down to a drone then, quite frankly, it's pathetic that they haven't sorted it in 24 hours
		
Click to expand...

Which is why I surmised it has to be the work of more than one person which is why it's proving hard to pin down but you'd thought the police and military (and other agencies now on the case) can't spot someone in the vicinity of the perimeter fence controlling this thing.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Just a wandering mind as much as anything else.
I just find it hard to believe that Gatwick has been at a standstill for 24 hours. If these drones have power for 30 minutes that's a hell of a lot of take offs, landings and battery charging going on.. Gatwick big but it ain't that big.
And if it really is all down to a drone then, quite frankly, it's pathetic that they haven't sorted it in 24 hours
		
Click to expand...

My understanding from the reports I saw on the google box was that it was more than one drone.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 20, 2018)

drdel said:



			Do you really think the Army and police are going tell everyone about their technology and tactics: they are not in the education business!!!!
		
Click to expand...

No chance but it's just a shame that they waited so long to call the army in, mind you most units closed down last week so they had to find someone before the duty rumour started saying that some bleep was going to get called out.


----------



## User2021 (Dec 20, 2018)

Must admit I am a bit sceptical of the story.
We live 10mins up the road
Heard Helicopter possibly two up last night, but not seen or heard anything tonight since getting home


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

Do the controllers or the drone give some sort of signal? Surely in this and age it must be possible to track where this is coming from. BBC news saying there was another sighting in the last hour


----------



## drdel (Dec 20, 2018)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Do the controllers or the drone give some sort of signal? Surely in this and age it must be possible to track where this is coming from. BBC news saying there was another sighting in the last hour
		
Click to expand...

Multiple, preprogrammed drones using 4G comms could be controlled from a considerable distance.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 20, 2018)

drdel said:



			Multiple, preprogrammed drones using 4G comms could be controlled from a considerable distance.
		
Click to expand...

But they must emit a signal. There has to be a way to pinpoint and track this.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)

drdel said:



			Multiple, preprogrammed drones using 4G comms could be controlled from a considerable distance.
		
Click to expand...

They could but there is still the issue of battery life. Most drones struggle to stay up for more than 30 minutes before a change of battery is needed. It does seem really odd that the police have a helicopter in the air, the drone is up and must be landing for a new battery but somehow they have failed to spot it land every single time. 

When I have my drones landing itâ€™s not a massively quick process, unless youâ€™re crashing it. Iâ€™m surprised that a police helicopter hasnâ€™t managed to spot that yet.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 20, 2018)

Police have just announced that they will shoot at the drone if deemed safe to do so.


----------



## rosecott (Dec 20, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



			Got any courses booked Jim?
		
Click to expand...

My daughter - BA cabin crew - is making all the arrangements. I just turn up Sunday.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 20, 2018)

rosecott said:



			My daughter - BA cabin crew - is making all the arrangements. I just turn up Sunday.
		
Click to expand...

If you end up at Mid Ocean, Port Royal or Belmont Hills we'll have to compare notes over the next curry.  Hope you get there mate, have a great time.


----------



## Dibby (Dec 21, 2018)

Well, it looks like flights have finally started to resume now.

I am intrigued to find out more about this story, drone is such a wide-ranging term that covers everything from a child's toy that can barely be controlled and lasts 5 minutes before running out of juice, up to a piece of kit the US military use to remotely take out targets in the Middle East  whilst being controlled from an office in New York.


----------



## rudebhoy (Dec 21, 2018)

Biggest defence budget in Europe, and we can't take out a drone? Laughable really ...


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 21, 2018)

rudebhoy said:



			Biggest defence budget in Europe, and we can't take out a drone? Laughable really ...
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps if the police had called out the army earlier part of the defence budget could have been used. It would have taken a bit if time to get assets in place as most units shut down last Friday.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 21, 2018)

Still think this is an odd one. 

With all the worlds media, police etc etc and the footage of the drone is very grainy and from a distance and almost none of it. 

May sound like a tin foil hat moment but still think thereâ€™s more here than meets the eye.


----------



## need_my_wedge (Dec 21, 2018)

HomerJSimpson said:



			Do the controllers or the drone give some sort of signal? Surely in this and age it must be possible to track where this is coming from. BBC news saying there was another sighting in the last hour
		
Click to expand...




need_my_wedge said:



			Was listening to Radio 4 news earlier. Apparently there are a number of ways to control them aside from normal remote control. They can have a pre-programmed route in them that doesnâ€™t require a remote control, only GPS. Or they can be remote controlled via phone on 4G, and you donâ€™t even need to be in the country to do that. I donâ€™t know much about them, I donâ€™t know if itâ€™s scaremongering, but it is worrying that whoever is doing this can bring it all to a standstill like this. Hope it gets sorted soon as my mum is supposed to be flying from Gatwick tomorrow.
		
Click to expand...

If they are using GPS or 4G, it will be a lot harder to track them down


----------



## Dibby (Dec 21, 2018)

need_my_wedge said:



			If they are using GPS or 4G, it will be a lot harder to track them down
		
Click to expand...

Surely if you obtain the drone, or it's SIM card signature, you can then just trace the path back down the network. If you can trace calls, it wouldn't be much different.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 21, 2018)

Dibby said:



			Surely if you obtain the drone, or it's SIM card signature, you can then just trace the path back down the network. If you can trace calls, it wouldn't be much different.
		
Click to expand...

The majority of retail drones are controlled via wifi, the link is either between a phone and the drone or a controller and the drone. Not sure how much more sophisticated this is however.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 21, 2018)

On a light hearted note for all our crab air friends


----------



## adam6177 (Dec 21, 2018)

Current predicted delay at Tenerife airport is currently just over 5 hours, on the plus side at least we're going to Gatwick and not somewhere else.

My son (who is 5) woke up at 3am and vomited 8 times in 2 hours.

Now I've seen there is an overturned lorry on the main road into east Sussex.... I'm hoping to be home by 2:30am. We shall see.

1st world problems eh.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 21, 2018)

rudebhoy said:



			Biggest defence budget in Europe, and we can't take out a drone? Laughable really ...
		
Click to expand...

Itâ€™s not the first time this has happened so you would think a big airport like this would have some sort of protocol to deal with it.
Are all our major airports this easy to disrupt?
If so things need to change, especially in court when they catch whoever it is.


----------



## pendodave (Dec 21, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Itâ€™s not the first time this has happened so you would think a big airport like this would have some sort of protocol to deal with it.
Are all our major airports this easy to disrupt?
If so things need to change, especially in court when they catch whoever it is.
		
Click to expand...

I'd imagine that not only are our airports this easy to disrupt, but also our roads and railways. If not by drones then by actions which are equally easy to perpetrate. Our country (not just ours, obvs) has become so used to very large numbers of people and goods moving about efficiently, but this just makes it even more vulnerable to disruption.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 21, 2018)

It's transport - it shouldn't be that difficult to work out why we didn't know what to do; that concerns raised by pilots association (2014 link) have been largely ignored; that we dithered about doing whatever little we could and in making decisions on what to do next.  Fayling Grayling - who else could it be!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29781931


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 21, 2018)

Gatwick shut down again


----------



## TheDork (Dec 21, 2018)

Old Skier said:



			Gatwick shut down again
		
Click to expand...

Surely I can't be the only one finding this all rather amusing.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 21, 2018)

TheDork said:



			Surely I can't be the only one finding this all rather amusing.
		
Click to expand...

Not sure those trying to fly in and out of Gatwick do.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 21, 2018)

Surely there's a way to track these drones, back to where they land ?


----------



## adam6177 (Dec 21, 2018)

TheDork said:



			Surely I can't be the only one finding this all rather amusing.
		
Click to expand...

I've been stuck in Tenerife airport for 6 hours.... Was hoping to be in the air in 90 minutes time.

I'm not finding it funny.


----------



## TheDork (Dec 21, 2018)

adam6177 said:



			I've been stuck in Tenerife airport for 6 hours.... Was hoping to be in the air in 90 minutes time.

I'm not finding it funny.
		
Click to expand...

My apologies, I don't for a second think that those caught up in it all are finding it amusing, what I find amusing is that someone somewhere is at the capours and the police and what seems like the army can't sort it out, it's comical and we all thought that brexit makes us look a laughing stock.


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 21, 2018)

Luckily I am now on holiday in Madeira, via Stanstead. However, I am returning via Gatwick on the 30th. Nothing about this experience has been remotely funny to me.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 21, 2018)

TheDork said:



			Surely I can't be the only one finding this all rather amusing.
		
Click to expand...

I would hope you are the only one.
Some people...


----------



## Lilyhawk (Dec 21, 2018)

Stuck at Stansted due to the 44 extra flights diverted from Gatwick. Merry Christmas.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 21, 2018)

Open again


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 21, 2018)

I don't find the situation funny but did think this was!


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 21, 2018)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Don't know why we are faffing about with this, sub up the Thames and a Trident missile, sorted mate.
Isn't that why we spend Â£trillions on it, to defend our country against a Â£200 toy.
		
Click to expand...

No you spend trillions on it because the people building them like to watch supermarket sweep, sleep and drink copious amounts of coffee while eating McDonaldâ€™s bought by the taxpayers credit card.
You canâ€™t keep a nuclear deterrent at sea365 days a year without McDonaldâ€™s and classic TV.

This is nothing new.  no point in licensing or restricting them. Weâ€™ve had rc planes and coptors since time began.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 21, 2018)

TheDork said:



			My apologies, I don't for a second think that those caught up in it all are finding it amusing, what I find amusing is that someone somewhere is at the capours and the police and what seems like the army can't sort it out, it's comical and we all thought that brexit makes us look a laughing stock.
		
Click to expand...

Well if it's that easy to fix tell us what they're missing.  I'm sure you could make a small fortune out of such useful insider knowledge...


----------



## Midnight (Dec 21, 2018)

I've just got back from working there, been there from ten this morning. I can tell you that all the services are pulling together and are trying to get this sorted. 
It is so frustrating, as for example you get multiple calls from different people of different sightings of what they believe are drones, everyone has to quite rightly be checked out, not all of them are drones.

All the forces want this sorted out as quick as possible to enable people to get home or go away for Christmas. It's soul destroying seeing young kids in Christmas hats being told there flights are cancelled to visit Santa.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 22, 2018)

Jamesbrown said:



			No you spend trillions on it because the people building them like to watch supermarket sweep, sleep and drink copious amounts of coffee while eating McDonaldâ€™s bought by the taxpayers credit card.
You canâ€™t keep a nuclear deterrent at sea365 days a year without McDonaldâ€™s and classic TV.

This is nothing new.  no point in licensing or restricting them. Weâ€™ve had rc planes and coptors since time began.
		
Click to expand...

Bit different. Drones can have cameras on them so can pilot them out of site.. I donâ€™t suspect the little rc planes would do anywhere near the kind of damage when they fall out the air because they donâ€™t hover like a drone which can remain in one place or suddenly assend 10 metres to avoid something


----------



## Dibby (Dec 22, 2018)

pauljames87 said:



			Bit different. Drones can have cameras on them so can pilot them out of site.. I donâ€™t suspect the little rc planes would do anywhere near the kind of damage when they fall out the air because they donâ€™t hover like a drone which can remain in one place or suddenly assend 10 metres to avoid something
		
Click to expand...

An RC helicopter could do just that, and both a plane and a helicopter could carry a camera, and realistically an RC plane could carry a much bigger payload. Drones do have more manoeuvrability in general. 
However, the biggest difference, in my opinion, is that there was a lot more skill involved in flying traditional RC planes and helicopters, and this took time and effort to learn, however with modern electronics this part is removed as you have gyros maintaining perfect stability, GPS providing perfect navigation, and 4G to control the vehicle from miles away.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 22, 2018)

Dibby said:



			An RC helicopter could do just that, and both a plane and a helicopter could carry a camera, and realistically an RC plane could carry a much bigger payload. Drones do have more manoeuvrability in general.
However, the biggest difference, in my opinion, is that there was a lot more skill involved in flying traditional RC planes and helicopters, and this took time and effort to learn, however with modern electronics this part is removed as you have gyros maintaining perfect stability, GPS providing perfect navigation, and 4G to control the vehicle from miles away.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly you have to be close to use the rc planes 

Making the drones the effective tool. 

Skill is  irrelevant


----------



## Dibby (Dec 22, 2018)

pauljames87 said:



			Exactly you have to be close to use the rc planes

Making the drones the effective tool.

Skill is  irrelevant
		
Click to expand...

No. You could have mounted a camera on an RC plane, and flown it like that years ago, they were experimenting with this as a precursor to guided bombs even back in WW2, it's nothing new. You would be limited by radio range, but this could still have been miles or tens of miles, just not the virtually unlimited range it is today.

The difference is flying the plane whilst not being on board it is tricky, as you have only visual feedback, you have no sense of feeling for subtle movements, or when it is about to stall, and tend to react much slower than if you were actually piloting from inside the aircraft. However, with modern electronics, the vehicle is gyroscopically stabilised, so you don't have to worry about this part, you only have to worry about telling it what you want it to do (as opposed to how). This could also apply to a modern RC plane, the only reason a "drone" (in quotes because technically any unmanned vehicle - even a plane or helicopter - is actually a drone)  is used, is because it is simpler than a traditional helicopter, and can hover, unlike a fixed-wing aircraft.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 22, 2018)

Dibby said:



			No. You could have mounted a camera on an RC plane, and flown it like that years ago, they were experimenting with this as a precursor to guided bombs even back in WW2, it's nothing new. You would be limited by radio range, but this could still have been miles or tens of miles, just not the virtually unlimited range it is today.

The difference is flying the plane whilst not being on board it is tricky, as you have only visual feedback, you have no sense of feeling for subtle movements, or when it is about to stall, and tend to react much slower than if you were actually piloting from inside the aircraft. However, with modern electronics, the vehicle is gyroscopically stabilised, so you don't have to worry about this part, you only have to worry about telling it what you want it to do (as opposed to how). This could also apply to a modern RC plane, the only reason a "drone" (in quotes because technically any unmanned vehicle - even a plane or helicopter - is actually a drone)  is used, is because it is simpler than a traditional helicopter, and can hover, unlike a fixed-wing aircraft.
		
Click to expand...


So like I said in the first place, drones far more effective. Anyone can use them. Can be piloted further away. Maxium disruption for minimum skill and effort.


----------



## Dibby (Dec 22, 2018)

pauljames87 said:



			So like I said in the first place, drones far more effective. Anyone can use them. Can be piloted further away. Maxium disruption for minimum skill and effort.
		
Click to expand...

Noone disagreed that drones were more effective. We just disagreed on the reason.

You claimed that drones had the advantaged of being able to be piloted out of site, and could hover, neither of these capabilities are new or exclusive to drones. 

I claimed that modern drones needed less skill, which you now seem to agree on but are claiming it was your assertion all along.

Anyway, consensus is reached, so nothing further to add.


----------



## bobmac (Dec 22, 2018)

And you can buy them in Currys


----------



## Dibby (Dec 22, 2018)

bobmac said:



			And you can buy them in Currys
		
Click to expand...

Yes, and you don't have to spend 12 months glueing together a load of balsa wood, and then another 6 months repairing it after your first attempt to fly it crashed on take off. Not speaking from childhood experience or anything!!!!


----------



## Imurg (Dec 22, 2018)

2 arrested last night......


----------



## larmen (Dec 22, 2018)

Imurg said:



			2 arrested last night......
		
Click to expand...

And 12 hours later it is still all we know.
I know it isnâ€™t technically our business, but I am curious if they got the right people, and what their motives might have been if it was then.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 22, 2018)

pauljames87 said:



			So like I said in the first place, drones far more effective. Anyone can use them. Can be piloted further away. Maxium disruption for minimum skill and effort.
		
Click to expand...




pauljames87 said:



			Bit different. Drones can have cameras on them so can pilot them out of site.. I donâ€™t suspect the little rc planes would do anywhere near the kind of damage when they fall out the air because they donâ€™t hover like a drone which can remain in one place or suddenly assend 10 metres to avoid something
		
Click to expand...


Not talking of little rc planes. Rc planes the same price as a dji mavic drone would be very effective. 

A couple of grand more and I could wipe out a small bungalow and its inhabitants with mini jet turbines. 

Drones are mass marketed therefore popular. Anything popular and bad press will follow. Following that a fringe of people calling for bans and extreme regulation. Happens with everything. 

Just one or two idiots. Itâ€™s happened before with other RC devices. Nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 22, 2018)

I fear it's only a matter of time before terrorists latch on to this.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 22, 2018)

larmen said:



			And 12 hours later it is still all we know.
I know it isnâ€™t technically our business, but I am curious if they got the right people, and what their motives might have been if it was then.
		
Click to expand...

In fairness, 12 hours in they possibly still don't know.  If they were arrested late night they won't be interviewed until the morning, or possibly later, depending on waiting for solicitors, the results of the house search and possibly the interrogation of any computers or electronics.  They'll also be sensitive to the danger of prejudicing any trial.

What has been released is that those arrested were a man of 47 and a woman of 54.  IF they are they right people, they were certainly old enough to know better and I, like you, am curious as to their motives.


----------



## larmen (Dec 22, 2018)

I know, but we are an inpatient society, and other countries would be getting live updates via tweets from their â€˜leaderâ€™ ;-)

OK, we are better of waiting for them to get the facts right.


----------



## woofers (Dec 22, 2018)

The Daily Telegraph website has a picture of and has named the two allegedly arrested. 
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/12/22/gatwick-drone-identities-arrested-couple-revealed/
The BBC news website has a picture of, and the address of, the house being searched.
Isn't this a bit unusual?
I am more accustomed to read something along the lines of "a man in his 40's and a woman in her 50's " and " an address in Crawley".


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 22, 2018)

Seems a strange demographic for the couple that have been arrested and so it'll be interesting to hear in the fullness of time what their motive was (if indeed they were the actual culprits and not merely connected in some other way)


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 22, 2018)

Again, foil hat moment but having read about the couple they donâ€™t seem the most obvious choice for this sort of thing. 

He has a background in RCâ€™s vehicles but not so much drones. Apparently sheâ€™s shown zero interest in any of it. 

His boss claims it couldnâ€™t have been him as he was at work etc. 

Could well turn out that they were behind it however at this point I just donâ€™t see it.


----------



## IainP (Dec 22, 2018)

"Eco-warriors" ?


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 22, 2018)

road2ruin said:



			Again, foil hat moment but having read about the couple they donâ€™t seem the most obvious choice for this sort of thing.

He has a background in RCâ€™s vehicles but not so much drones. Apparently sheâ€™s shown zero interest in any of it.

His boss claims it couldnâ€™t have been him as he was at work etc.

Could well turn out that they were behind it however at this point I just donâ€™t see it.
		
Click to expand...

The guy's boss has said that he was at work from 7am to 5pm last Monday to Friday so it couldn't have been him that did it. Will be interesting to see how it all pans out.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 22, 2018)

Sounds more like a teenage thing , do they have kids ?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 22, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			The guy's boss has said that he was at work from 7am to 5pm last Monday to Friday so it couldn't have been him that did it. Will be interesting to see how it all pans out.
		
Click to expand...

He could have controlled it from work.
Would need someone else to prep the drone though. Batteries etc.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 22, 2018)

I still think there were more people involved. For the drone to have been sighted as many times, there would have to have been more than one or someone on the ground changing batteries regularly. If the guy has an alibi from work it will make it hard to prove his involvement and I can't see a boss coming out to say he was working and risking his own position


----------



## Smiffy (Dec 23, 2018)




----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 23, 2018)

The problem I have with the suspects identities being published, is that IF they are innocent, they will forever be associated with it, it will ruin their lives. 

No smoke without fire some will say , but put yourselves in a position of being arrested for a high profile crime you didnâ€™t do and your details being out there,
By all means release details once they have been charged, but itâ€™s dangerous to do so before. 

But if they are guilty, feed them to the wolves


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 23, 2018)

PhilTheFragger said:



			The problem I have with the suspects identities being published, is that IF they are innocent, they will forever be associated with it, it will ruin their lives.

No smoke without fire some will say , but put yourselves in a position of being arrested for a high profile crime you didnâ€™t do and your details being out there,
By all means release details once they have been charged, but itâ€™s dangerous to do so before.

But if they are guilty, feed them to the wolves
		
Click to expand...

Cliff Richard springs to mind


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 23, 2018)

williamalex1 said:



			Cliff Richard springs to mind 

Click to expand...

Same principle and that ended well for the bbc .....not


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Dec 23, 2018)

PhilTheFragger said:



			The problem I have with the suspects identities being published, is that IF they are innocent, they will forever be associated with it, it will ruin their lives.

No smoke without fire some will say , but put yourselves in a position of being arrested for a high profile crime you didnâ€™t do and your details being out there,
By all means release details once they have been charged, but itâ€™s dangerous to do so before.

But if they are guilty, feed them to the wolves
		
Click to expand...

Isnâ€™t it balance though, some people in some cases have come forward once they believe it is safe to do so, (ie Child abuse cases) or to stand up for the accussed with alibiâ€™s etc.
I certainly believe in innocent till proven guilty, but sometimes there is a rather large grey area.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 23, 2018)

pauldj42 said:



			Isnâ€™t it balance though, some people in some cases have come forward once they believe it is safe to do so, (ie Child abuse cases) or to stand up for the accussed with alibiâ€™s etc.
I certainly believe in innocent till proven guilty, but sometimes there is a rather large grey area.
		
Click to expand...

I have no problem with identities being made public after charges have been laid, and if that encourages other victims to come forward, then Iâ€™m all for that.

What I strongly object to is the identification of individuals and addresses etc, before charges have been made, this is the stuff of a kangaroo court, can only result in a world of pain if the people being questioned are innocent


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 23, 2018)

The Daily Mails article on the Military 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...one-causing-chaos-tens-thousands-Gatwick.html

Btw itâ€™s full of nonsense and false facts ðŸ˜‚ good old Daily Mail and their sources


----------



## User2021 (Dec 23, 2018)

PhilTheFragger said:



			I have no problem with identities being made public after charges have been laid, and if that encourages other victims to come forward, then Iâ€™m all for that.

What I strongly object to is the identification of individuals and addresses etc, before charges have been made, this is the stuff of a kangaroo court, can only result in a world of pain if the people being questioned are innocent
		
Click to expand...

Have always thought nobody should be named until convicted.
Trouble is in some cases, once a name is out there, more people come forward and can report things.

Its like there needs to be different rules for different acquasations, but that is a ridiculous idea.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 23, 2018)

PhilTheFragger said:



			I have no problem with identities being made public after charges have been laid, and if that encourages other victims to come forward, then Iâ€™m all for that.

What I strongly object to is the identification of individuals and addresses etc, before charges have been made, this is the stuff of a kangaroo court, can only result in a world of pain if the people being questioned are innocent
		
Click to expand...

I think the BBC have done what they usually do, age the suspects, their region and show their property. By doing that it prompts local's who may have snippets of information that when pieced together build a bigger picture of them and their actions.

Merry Christmas


----------



## Imurg (Dec 23, 2018)

Both been released without charge....


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 23, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Both been released without charge....
		
Click to expand...

Itâ€™s either a case being investigated by the keystone cops or a massive cover up. Iâ€™m leaning towards the latter.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 23, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Both been released without charge....
		
Click to expand...

My point in a nutshell 

Assuming they are totally innocent and arenâ€™t involved in any further enquiries , I hope they sue whichever paper published their details


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			I think the BBC have done what they usually do, age the suspects, their region and show their property. By doing that it prompts local's who may have snippets of information that when pieced together build a bigger picture of them and their actions.

Merry Christmas
		
Click to expand...

Isnâ€™t that the polices job not the BBC?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

williamalex1 said:



			Cliff Richard springs to mind 

Click to expand...

Canâ€™t belive Cliffs got a drone!


----------



## Imurg (Dec 23, 2018)

Kerching!!!
Obviously highly intrusive for them but likely to be fairly lucrative


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 23, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Isnâ€™t that the polices job not the BBC?
		
Click to expand...

Of course, but it's normal for the police to release certain information for tactical reasons.

Merry Christmas


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 23, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Canâ€™t belive Cliffs got a drone!
		
Click to expand...

Well,  he drone's on....

Merry Christmas


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

Imurg said:



			Kerching!!!
Obviously highly intrusive for them but likely to be fairly lucrative
		
Click to expand...

Licence payers money again paying damages.
Will they carry on doing this?
Itâ€™s wrong really ,nobody should be named until at least charged.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

Bunkermagnet said:



			Of course, but it's normal for the police to release certain information for tactical reasons.

Merry Christmas
		
Click to expand...

I think the BBC are trying to compete with social media in this field .
If thereâ€™s police cars outside their house the twits on Twitter of this world donâ€™t miss a trick.
But the BBC should not open themselves to court action by transmitting this stuff until some evidence is found and culprits charged at least.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 23, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Licence payers money again paying damages.
Will they carry on doing this?
Itâ€™s wrong really ,nobody should be named until at least charged.
		
Click to expand...

Why would the BBC pay damages ? Their names were released in a Telegraph report and right now nothing other than facts were shown , they were taken into questioning by the police they werenâ€™t accused of anything and then released. Sue for what exactly ?


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			Why would the BBC pay damages ? Their names were released in a Telegraph report and right now nothing other than facts were shown , they were taken into questioning by the police they werenâ€™t accused of anything and then released. Sue for what exactly ?
		
Click to expand...

Am sure a good lawyer will think of something.

Didnâ€™t they say in Cliffs case they only used the FACTS.
That didnâ€™t go to well.


----------



## woofers (Dec 23, 2018)

Donâ€™t think the Beeb are necessarily at fault. The Torygraph was the one that published their pictures and names and if innocent I would suggest the couple have a decent case against that particular publication - defamation of character, intrusion, etc etc.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 23, 2018)

woofers said:



			Donâ€™t think the Beeb are necessarily at fault. The Torygraph was the one that published their pictures and names and if innocent I would suggest the couple have a decent case against that particular publication - defamation of character, intrusion, etc etc.
		
Click to expand...

The papers donâ€™t do the news at ten though and I am sure it was on the BBC.
Just because itâ€™s in the papers they donâ€™t have to put it on prime time news tv.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 23, 2018)

At the cost of millions the wrong people arrested.

I thought we had the best intelligence in the world.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 23, 2018)

Arrests and questioning before subsequent release without charge is just a normal part of police inquiries. Itâ€™s not a massive bungle or anything.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Dec 23, 2018)

It's not a bungle by the police but it is by the press for identifying 2 people who are now found innocent. They should not have been named,  they should not have been filming their house.


----------



## bobmac (Dec 23, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Arrests and questioning before subsequent release without charge is just a normal part of police inquiries. Itâ€™s not a massive bungle or anything.
		
Click to expand...

I thought if someone was arrested, they were normally charged?


----------



## woofers (Dec 23, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Arrests and questioning before subsequent release without charge is just a normal part of police inquiries. Itâ€™s not a massive bungle or anything.
		
Click to expand...

Yes, but publishing names and  photographs is not a normal part of police enquiries.
We donâ€™t know how the newspaper obtained the details but I still contend itâ€™s not usual practice to publish these, (unless of course the Telegraph editor, proprietor or head of legal happened to have their flight delayed by said events ðŸ˜„)


----------



## woofers (Dec 23, 2018)

bobmac said:



			I thought if someone was arrested, they were normally charged?
		
Click to expand...

No, you can be arrested â€œon suspicionâ€ ......


----------



## User2021 (Dec 23, 2018)

bobmac said:



			I thought if someone was arrested, they were normally charged?
		
Click to expand...

Not at all
Arrested
Plod realises incompetence
Released without charge


----------



## MegaSteve (Dec 23, 2018)

Wwonder if they were dobbed in by their local curtain twitchers....


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 23, 2018)

I reckon the fuzz have been searching the database of registered drone operators and found these two in the Gatwick area, put 2+2 and came up with 12.

The real perps are highly unlikely to be registered anywhere .


----------



## user2010 (Dec 23, 2018)

Lord Tyrion said:



			It's not* a bungle* by the police but it is by the press for identifying 2 people who are now found innocent. They should not have been named,  they should not have been filming their house.
		
Click to expand...




That's a Bungle.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 23, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Arrests and questioning before subsequent release without charge is just a normal part of police inquiries. *Itâ€™s not a massive bungle or anything.*

Click to expand...

It might well be in this case. Surely the police have to have some sort of suspicion to arrest, otherwise they can just arrest anyone for anything. Seeing as the police have now said that there may not have been a drone at all, they seem like utter amateurs. 

Seems so dodgy to me.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 23, 2018)

I can see this rumbling along but I fear if this was done by criminals, eco-warriors or even on the orders from the Kremlin (lets face it anything is possible with this) then tracing them is going to be a long and difficult job. I couldn't see two people like those arrested being involved and think the police jumped the gun, even if they were working on information provided.


----------



## User2021 (Dec 23, 2018)

Sky news at 9pm showed a clip of the two that were arrested being taken home - faces obscured.

Bit late, after most papers and numerous sites posted pictures and named them earlier.


----------



## Smiffy (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			It might well be in this case. *Surely the police have to have some sort of suspicion to arrest*, otherwise they can just arrest anyone for anything. Seeing as the police have now said that there may not have been a drone at all, they seem like utter amateurs. Seems so dodgy to me.
		
Click to expand...

They were acting on information received, a "tip off" if you like, from a member of the public. Quite rightly, they had to follow it up.
This all went tits up when the media got hold of it and published pictures and names.
The police have got nothing to answer for.
Had they *NOT* acted on the information received and it *HAD* turned out to be this couple involved then we'd have something to moan about.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 24, 2018)

Smiffy said:



			They were acting on information received, a "tip off" if you like, from a member of the public. Quite rightly, they had to follow it up.
This all went tits up when the media got hold of it and published pictures and names.
The police have got nothing to answer for.
Had they *NOT* acted on the information received and it *HAD* turned out to be this couple involved then we'd have something to moan about.
		
Click to expand...

Apparently the guy involved had a cast iron alibi however the person giving it had to contact police himself and was ignored a lot

However .. as this came from the press and they caused the issue of naming the guy involved id say itâ€™s rubbish.. and that they are trying to deflect blame from something completely their fault


----------



## User2021 (Dec 24, 2018)

Police now reporting that there may not have been any drone in the first place
ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			It might well be in this case. Surely the police have to have some sort of suspicion to arrest, otherwise they can just arrest anyone for anything. Seeing as the police have now said that there may not have been a drone at all, they seem like utter amateurs.

Seems so dodgy to me.
		
Click to expand...

Yes. Low level of proof needed to arrest. Much higher required to charge.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Smiffy said:



			They were acting on information received, a "tip off" if you like, from a member of the public. Quite rightly, they had to follow it up.
This all went tits up when the media got hold of it and published pictures and names.
The police have got nothing to answer for.
Had they *NOT* acted on the information received and it *HAD* turned out to be this couple involved then we'd have something to moan about.
		
Click to expand...

They were held for 36 hours and the bloke had a solid alibi. There's a difference between following something up and arresting someone.  

Seeing as the police have now backtracked and admitted that there might not have been a drone at all, I think that their treatment of these two seems shoddy to say the least.


----------



## Bunkermagnet (Dec 24, 2018)

jobr1850 said:



			Police now reporting that there may not have been any drone in the first place
ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚ðŸ˜‚
		
Click to expand...

It was said on the radio news yesterday that they had found a damaged drone around the perimter of Gatwick which had been taken away for forensic testing.

Merry Christmas.


----------



## bobmac (Dec 24, 2018)




----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			They were held for 36 hours and the bloke had a solid alibi. There's a difference between following something up and arresting someone. 

Seeing as the police have now backtracked and admitted that there might not have been a drone at all, I think that their treatment of these two seems shoddy to say the least.
		
Click to expand...

If they have a decent lawyer they should do very nicely out of it.

Something very fishy going on with this, it seems like a side show to cover up for something more sinister.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 24, 2018)

Doon frae Troon said:



			If they have a decent lawyer they should do very nicely out of it.

Something very fishy going on with this, it seems like a side show *to cover up for something more sinister*.
		
Click to expand...

A cunning plan to get Fayling Grayling to resign?


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			They were held for 36 hours and *the bloke had a solid alibi.* There's a difference between following something up and arresting someone. 

Seeing as the police have now backtracked and admitted that there might not have been a drone at all, I think that their treatment of these two seems shoddy to say the least.
		
Click to expand...

And how do they know that the bloke had a solid alibi until the alibi had been tested?


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

Exactly. Just because the public think being arrested indicates guilt doesnâ€™t make it the case. The correct process was followed.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



			And how do they know that the bloke had a solid alibi until the alibi had been tested?
		
Click to expand...

His employer confirmed he was working. The police usually check these things but as mentioned earlier in this thread, the employer had to chase them up. 

All quite bizarre.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Exactly. Just because the public think being arrested indicates guilt doesnâ€™t make it the case. *The correct process was followed.*

Click to expand...

We'll see when an inevitable enquiry is held as to whether this really the case.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 24, 2018)

A lot of tin foil needed - have a feeling if the police didnâ€™t follow up any reports then they would be criticised, they followed up something , people were questioned and released , the people who were arrested donâ€™t seem to be making a drama out of it 

As for the chance of no drone - the police are just covering all angles, they just said they canâ€™t rule out the possibility of false reporting. 

Seems at time they canâ€™t win the police - if they hasnâ€™t reacted and a drone hit a plane imagine the reaction


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A lot of tin foil needed - have a feeling if the police didnâ€™t follow up any reports then they would be criticised, they followed up something , people were questioned and released , the people who were arrested donâ€™t seem to be making a drama out of it

As for the chance of no drone - the police are just covering all angles, they just said they canâ€™t rule out the possibility of false reporting.

Seems at time they canâ€™t win the police - if they hasnâ€™t reacted and a drone hit a plane imagine the reaction
		
Click to expand...

Thatâ€™s my exact take on the situation. Police are often damned if they do and damned if they donâ€™t.


----------



## TheDiablo (Dec 24, 2018)

Liverpoolphil said:



			A lot of tin foil needed - have a feeling if the police didnâ€™t follow up any reports then they would be criticised, they followed up something , people were questioned and released , the people who were arrested donâ€™t seem to be making a drama out of it

As for the chance of no drone - the police are just covering all angles, they just said they canâ€™t rule out the possibility of false reporting.

Seems at time they canâ€™t win the police - if they hasnâ€™t reacted and a drone hit a plane imagine the reaction
		
Click to expand...

They weren't just questioned though, they were arrested - there's a fairly big difference. They'll be keeping quiet on the advice of lawyers, who will be working to get some pretty hefty settlements out of media outlets for intrusive reporting and probably the police for false imprisonment with an nda keeping them quiet. Failing that they'll have an exclusive in a Sunday paper before long. 

I fully agree the police should be looking into all lines of enquiry, but in this specific instance it appears they got a lot wrong, and with potentially life changing consequences for the wrongly accused are rightfully being scrutinised. As for the media, they'll keep acting in a despicable way unchecked and cry 'freedom of the press' whenever challenged by authority.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

TheDiablo said:



			They weren't just questioned though, they were arrested - there's a fairly big difference. They'll be keeping quiet on the advice of lawyers, who will be working to get some pretty hefty settlements out of media outlets for intrusive reporting and probably the police for false imprisonment with an nda keeping them quiet. Failing that they'll have an exclusive in a Sunday paper before long.

I fully agree the police should be looking into all lines of enquiry, but in this specific instance it appears they got a lot wrong, and with potentially life changing consequences for the wrongly accused are rightfully being scrutinised. As for the media, they'll keep acting in a despicable way unchecked and cry 'freedom of the press' whenever challenged by authority.
		
Click to expand...

They will NOT be done for false imprisonment. Being arrested is a standard procedure during an investigation. They will have had grounds to make that arrest. You have a complete misunderstanding of the process behind such a thing.

The vast majority of people who are arrested are not charged.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

TheDiablo said:



			They weren't just questioned though, they were arrested - there's a fairly big difference. They'll be keeping quiet on the advice of lawyers, who will be working to get some pretty hefty settlements out of media outlets for intrusive reporting and probably the police for false imprisonment with an nda keeping them quiet. Failing that they'll have an exclusive in a Sunday paper before long.

I fully agree the police should be looking into all lines of enquiry, but in this specific instance it appears they got a lot wrong, and with potentially life changing consequences for the wrongly accused are rightfully being scrutinised. As for the media, they'll keep acting in a despicable way unchecked and cry 'freedom of the press' whenever challenged by authority.
		
Click to expand...

That's how I see it. The police should absolutely follow up leads, but that doesn't mean arrest at the first instance. This is what happened here and why I'm critical of these actions.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			They will NOT be done for false imprisonment. Being arrested is a standard procedure during an investigation. *They will have had grounds to make that arrest. *You have a complete misunderstanding of the process behind such a thing.

The vast majority of people who are arrested are not charged.
		
Click to expand...

What's that based on?


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			What's that based on?
		
Click to expand...

Because the police must have some reason to arrest. Thatâ€™s the law. But they donâ€™t have to release that and especially not with an ongoing investigation!


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			That's how I see it. The police should absolutely follow up leads, but that doesn't mean arrest at the first instance. This is what happened here and why I'm critical of these actions.
		
Click to expand...

You donâ€™t think they should arrest someone in an incident where there are ongoing airport closures and a potential national security risk attached to that?

Are you serious?


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

So you're basing it on trusting the police have done their job correctly? That's fair enough, but I'm afraid I don't have as much trust in the Sussex Police.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			You donâ€™t think they should arrest someone in an incident where there are ongoing airport closures and a potential national security risk attached to that?

Are you serious?
		
Click to expand...

Not if their 'evidence' is, at best, utterly tenuous.

I will show my cards a bit now and say that the couple who were arrested are friends of friends. The whole thing is laughable, as we will all find out in the coming months.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			So you're basing it on trusting the police have done their job correctly? That's fair enough, but I'm afraid I don't have as much trust in the Sussex Police.
		
Click to expand...

I have no great trust for police but they will have had evidence that they felt was enough for arrest during a serious investigation. Of course that may be challenged but at this stage someone will have an auditable record of why these arrests occurred. 

Anyone who was suspected was always going to be arrested given the nature of the situation - they will seek to protect the biggest number of people.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			Not if their 'evidence' is, at best, utterly tenuous.

I will show my cards a bit now and say that the couple who were arrested are friends of friends. The whole thing is laughable, as we will all find out in the coming months.
		
Click to expand...

It might be tenuous in your opinion but look at the gravity of the situation. They were obviously going to act very decisively on any intelligence they received. I think thatâ€™s correct.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

The 'intelligence' they received was that the bloke was obsessed by drones. The police acted quickly, and in my opinion, wrongly. As said, we'll all see in the coming months whether the police action was justified or not, most likely via an investigation. 

I get that without full facts any rational person would think that there is more to these arrests, but I'm afraid there isn't.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			The 'intelligence' they received was that the bloke was obsessed by drones. The police acted quickly, and in my opinion, wrongly. As said, we'll all see in the coming months whether the police action was justified or not, most likely via an investigation.

I get that without full facts any rational person would think that there is more to these arrests, but I'm afraid there isn't.
		
Click to expand...

And if so, they will have judged that tiny morsel against the ongoing situation and taken a calculated gamble.

Being arrested infers no guilt. If they do take legal action, then theyâ€™re idiots.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Being arrested means the police should have reasonable belief that they were involved. Because the bloke lived nearby and loves drones doesn't sound like reasonable belief to me.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			Being arrested means the police should have reasonable belief that they were involved. Because the bloke lived nearby and loves drones doesn't sound like reasonable belief to me.
		
Click to expand...

With no other leads and the gravity of the situation, itâ€™s feasible. Iâ€™d expect that to be enough after that amount of time. 

As someone said before - imagine if they didnâ€™t act on that knowledge and worse happened.


----------



## PhilTheFragger (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Being arrested infers no guilt. If they do take legal action, then theyâ€™re idiots.
		
Click to expand...

You really believe that ? There will be some people around who will always think of him as â€œthe drone blokeâ€.

People will talk behind his back,  cross the street to avoid him, his life will never be the same again, and this is why there has to be a ban on reporting faces, names and addresses until charges have been made .

Because it isnâ€™t right


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

Just seen their press release. 

Crocodile tears come to mind. 

Considering the media weâ€™re repsonsibie for their names being spread about, theyâ€™re miraculously happy enough to use them to display their pain and suffering now...... Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£


----------



## TheDiablo (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			They will NOT be done for false imprisonment. Being arrested is a standard procedure during an investigation. They will have had grounds to make that arrest. You have a complete misunderstanding of the process behind such a thing.

The vast majority of people who are arrested are not charged.
		
Click to expand...

You have absolutely no idea


Kellfire said:



			They will NOT be done for false imprisonment. Being arrested is a standard procedure during an investigation. They will have had grounds to make that arrest. You have a complete misunderstanding of the process behind such a thing.

The vast majority of people who are arrested are not charged.
		
Click to expand...

I've no idea of specifics on this exact case, more commenting on what their lawyers will be looking into before they release any public statement. 

In high profile cases the pressure is higher, and mistakes are made more often as the desire for results quickly can lead to errors. The price to pay is then higher - there is a real possibility if there were any mistakes made then lawyers will be suing the police, potentially for false imprisonment. If you don't think that's a possibility then it is you that has a completely misunderstanding behind such a thing, not myself.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

So if this was something related to a hobby that you're massively into, you wouldn't mind being locked up for 36 hours on that basis? That's mental.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 24, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			Just seen their press release.

Crocodile tears come to mind.

Considering the media weâ€™re repsonsibie for their names being spread about, theyâ€™re miraculously happy enough to use them to display their pain and suffering now...... Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£
		
Click to expand...

And why shouldnâ€™t they? Given the way they were treated with their faces/names splashed across the press with words such as â€˜moronsâ€™ etc, in their situation Iâ€™d be getting as much as possible out of the whole episode.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 24, 2018)

Isn't the point of arresting them so that they can be interviewed under caution? It's the whole "you don't have to say anything, but anything you do say" part of the arrest to have their story on the official record.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			Just seen their press release.

Crocodile tears come to mind.

Considering the media weâ€™re repsonsibie for their names being spread about, theyâ€™re miraculously happy enough to use them to display their pain and suffering now...... Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£Â£
		
Click to expand...

Did you actually listen to what was said? They asked the media for privacy.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

PhilTheFragger said:



			You really believe that ? There will be some people around who will always think of him as â€œthe drone blokeâ€.

People will talk behind his back,  cross the street to avoid him, his life will never be the same again, and this is why there has to be a ban on reporting faces, names and addresses until charges have been made .

Because it isnâ€™t right
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™m talking only about the police here. They did nothing wrong by arresting. 

The press however should NOT be allowed to report anything.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			So if this was something related to a hobby that you're massively into, you wouldn't mind being locked up for 36 hours on that basis? That's mental.
		
Click to expand...

I wouldnâ€™t exactly be impartial, would I? Of course Iâ€™d be annoyed but I wouldnâ€™t think I have any basis to sue them. 

Iâ€™d be looking to blame the press for anything like that.


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

road2ruin said:



			And why shouldnâ€™t they? Given the way they were treated with their faces/names splashed across the press with words such as â€˜moronsâ€™ etc, in their situation Iâ€™d be getting as much as possible out of the whole episode.
		
Click to expand...

It depends who they are going after. If the police followed the correct steps then they should be left alone. Police canâ€™t become fearful of following up reports in case they hurt someoneâ€™s feelings. 

If itâ€™s the press, then do so through the correct channels (the courts), donâ€™t go using said media to build a case thatâ€™ll be hard to try fairly as everyone will have formed an opinion prior to the case being heard.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

ColchesterFC said:



			Isn't the point of arresting them so that they can be interviewed under caution? It's the whole "you don't have to say anything, but anything you do say" part of the arrest to have their story on the official record.
		
Click to expand...

Exactly. Plus if they question them voluntarily it allows for evidence to be hidden. Arresting stops the ability to conceal.


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			Did you actually listen to what was said? They asked the media for privacy.
		
Click to expand...

Via the media........

Itâ€™s all pr, they arenâ€™t the first or last that will use it. But for me itâ€™s nothing more than making sure the most money can be squeezed from the situation.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			I wouldnâ€™t exactly be impartial, would I? Of course Iâ€™d be annoyed but I wouldnâ€™t think I have any basis to sue them.

Iâ€™d be looking to blame the press for anything like that.
		
Click to expand...

I can't believe anyone would think that having a perfectly legal hobby should ever lead to arrest on the basis of public safety, simply because there's a nutter who's using the same hobby to cause disruption. He flies drones for his kicks - he doesn't make bombs ffs.


Papas1982 said:



			Via the media........

Itâ€™s all pr, they arenâ€™t the first or last that will use it. But for me itâ€™s nothing more than making sure the most money can be squeezed from the situation.
		
Click to expand...

Is this a joke?  How else would they release a statement?


----------



## TheDiablo (Dec 24, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			It depends who they are going after. If the police followed the correct steps then they should be left alone. Police canâ€™t become fearful of following up reports in case they hurt someoneâ€™s feelings.

If itâ€™s the press, then do so through the correct channels (the courts), donâ€™t go using said media to build a case thatâ€™ll be hard to try fairly as everyone will have formed an opinion prior to the case being heard.
		
Click to expand...

They won't be trying the media in a criminal court!!!! 

They'll take civil action, no jury, and professional judges won't use any opinion on a case.


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			I can't believe anyone would think that having a perfectly legal hobby should ever lead to arrest on the basis of public safety, simply because there's a nutter who's using the same hobby to cause disruption. He flies drones for his kicks - he doesn't make bombs ffs.

Is this a joke?  How else would they release a statement?
		
Click to expand...

Why do they need to release a statement? Do claimants for all cases that go to court need to release one?


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			I can't believe anyone would think that having a perfectly legal hobby should ever lead to arrest on the basis of public safety, simply because there's a nutter who's using the same hobby to cause disruption. He flies drones for his kicks - he doesn't make bombs ffs.
		
Click to expand...

And how do the police find that out?

By arresting and speaking under caution whilst searching the house for evidence. 

Due process was followed. And the pair were rightly released.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			And how do the police find that out?

By arresting and speaking under caution whilst searching the house for evidence.

Due process was followed. And the pair were rightly released.
		
Click to expand...

That's just not true, is it? In a murder enquiry for example, there's often a number of suspects. You don't just arrest all of them. This idea that the police arrest first and ask questions later is rubbish.


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

TheDiablo said:



			They won't be trying the media in a criminal court!!!!

They'll take civil action, no jury, and professional judges won't use any opinion on a case.
		
Click to expand...

Ok worded poorly on my behalf, I didnâ€™t mean a jury would be bias, but imo if a case has more media coverage then penalties are likely to be higher to set an example. 

Iâ€™m sure they did this release on advice, that for me is why itâ€™s wrong. Itâ€™s nit their fault as such, more the culture of people always thinking theyâ€™re owed something. 
I mean so far has this incident cost them anything tangeable? Or do feelings now have a price?


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			Why do they need to release a statement? Do claimants for all cases that go to court need to release one?
		
Click to expand...

They don't have to, but they asked for the media to leave them alone. The media by the way, who are camped outside their house. They didn't invite them round to make the statement - they were already there.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			His employer confirmed he was working. The police usually check these things but as mentioned earlier in this thread, the employer had to chase them up.

All quite bizarre.
		
Click to expand...

Was he working under his employer's nose all that time; or was he out and about in a company van?  I'm office based but with freedom to roam, so as long as my site visits are marked up on the whiteboard, I'm "at work" between those hours.  Not necessarily much of an alibi, is it?


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			That's just not true, is it? In a murder enquiry for example, there's often a number of suspects. You don't just arrest all of them. This idea that the police arrest first and ask questions later is rubbish.
		
Click to expand...

They will have felt they had enough of a reason to arrest before. Then they use the time afforded to them by the arrest to conduct further investigations. Thatâ€™s EXACTLY how it works.

Which is why the vast majority of people who get arrested are NOT charged.

And yes. All suspects would be arrested at the same time if known at the same time! They wouldnâ€™t want suspects being able to correlate stories or to abscond. Youâ€™re completely wrong there!


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			They will have felt they had enough of a reason to arrest before. Then they use the time afforded to them by the arrest to conduct further investigations. Thatâ€™s EXACTLY how it works.

Which is why the vast majority of people who get arrested are NOT charged.
		
Click to expand...

We're going round in circles. It's going to all come out in a couple of months or a year, or whenever


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			They don't have to, but they asked for the media to leave them alone. The media by the way, who are camped outside their house. They didn't invite them round to make the statement - they were already there.
		
Click to expand...

The press are being vultures. Thatâ€™s without doubt.


----------



## TheDiablo (Dec 24, 2018)

Papas1982 said:



			Ok worded poorly on my behalf, I didnâ€™t mean a jury would be bias, but imo if a case has more media coverage then penalties are likely to be higher to set an example.

Iâ€™m sure they did this release on advice, that for me is why itâ€™s wrong. Itâ€™s nit their fault as such, more the culture of people always thinking theyâ€™re owed something.
I mean so far has this incident cost them anything tangeable? Or do feelings now have a price?
		
Click to expand...

So you think they shouldn't be acting on professional advice? 

I also think you're greatly underestimating the potential effect on your life being called morons on the front page on a national newspaper on one of the most high profile and emotive stories of the year, by someone in media with millions and millions of followers on twitter and the front page of the most visited newssite in the world. 

Are they being opportunistic? Probably. Would I be? Undoubtedly.


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

TheDiablo said:



			So you think they shouldn't be acting on professional advice?

I also think you're greatly underestimating the potential effect on your life being called morons on the front page on a national newspaper on one of the most high profile and emotive stories of the year, by someone in media with millions and millions of followers on twitter and the front page of the most visited newssite in the world.

*Are they being opportunistic? Probably. Would I be? Undoubtedly*.
		
Click to expand...

I think being honest, so would I. It just frustrates me that in this day and age itâ€™s come to it. 

Iâ€™m not sure I agree in regards to the effects on their life, but that will only be known in the future I suppose. If people start egging there house or abusing them in the street then I would concede itâ€™s actaully had a real effect. 

Re the professional advice, I just donâ€™t like how nowadays companies go after cases for a slice of cash, nit for the right reasons. See ppi, accidents and food poisoning on hols etc


----------



## Papas1982 (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			They don't have to, but they asked for the media to leave them alone. The media by the way, who are camped outside their house. They didn't invite them round to make the statement - they were already there.
		
Click to expand...

Oh I agree the media are vultures, Iâ€™ve had to deal with them once many years ago and to this day I wouldnâ€™t trust em as far as I could throw em.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			That's how I see it. The police should absolutely follow up leads, but that doesn't mean arrest at the first instance. This is what happened here and why I'm critical of these actions.
		
Click to expand...

Can you explain exactly what the police did, all the enquiries they made, and all the bits they didn't do, prior to arresting your mates?  No, thought not.

You may be right, maybe they should have done more, but you don't know any more than the rest of us do about what enquiries were made prior to the arrests.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



			Can you explain exactly what the police did, all the enquiries they made, and all the bits they didn't do, prior to arresting your mates?  No, thought not.

You may be right, maybe they should have done more, but you don't know any more than the rest of us do about what enquiries were made prior to the arrests.
		
Click to expand...

As I already alluded to, I do know some details that are not in the public domain on this. The police do not come out of this well. 

But you guys go on telling everyone what a great job the police have done. Merry Christmas


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			As I already alluded to, I do know some details that are not in the public domain on this. The police do not come out of this well.

But you guys go on telling everyone what a great job the police have done. Merry Christmas 

Click to expand...

Youâ€™re not being impartial. Itâ€™s easy to say the police did something wrong in hindsight. For me, and I suspect a great many, the intelligence we do know so far is enough for them to be arrested given the situation as it was.


----------



## Blue in Munich (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			As I already alluded to, I do know some details that are not in the public domain on this. The police do not come out of this well.

But you guys go on telling everyone what a great job the police have done. Merry Christmas 

Click to expand...

And yet, when asked to explain what they have & haven't done, you don't.  

Nowhere in my post does it say the police have done a good job; I've actually conceded that you might be proved right in the post you've quoted.  What I'm not prepared to do is judge them on the basis of your comments, comments which you are unwilling or, more likely, unable to substantiate.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			Youâ€™re not being impartial. Itâ€™s easy to say the police did something wrong in hindsight. For me, and I suspect a great many, the intelligence we do know so far is enough for them to be arrested given the situation as it was.
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™ve heard on many occasions the sayingâ€ helping police with there enquiries â€œ without making them public.

Always remember the women who got murdered in Bristol and the landlord was wrongly accused,ruined his life because his identity was made public.
As I understand it,it was because the police wanted to show they were actually doing something.
Keep identities under wraps until 100% certain.

In such a sensitive case as this and costing millions imo they should be compensated.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

pokerjoke said:



			Iâ€™ve heard on many occasions the sayingâ€ helping police with there enquiries â€œ without making them public.

Always remember the women who got murdered in Bristol and the landlord was wrongly accused,ruined his life because his identity was made public.
As I understand it,it was because the police wanted to show they were actually doing something.
Keep identities under wraps until 100% certain.

In such a sensitive case as this and costing millions imo they should be compensated.
		
Click to expand...

By who? The police did nothing wrong that we know of.


----------



## howbow88 (Dec 24, 2018)

Blue in Munich said:



			And yet, when asked to explain what they have & haven't done, you don't.
		
Click to expand...

What are you wittering on about? I've already posted the reasons that the police acted.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 24, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			By who? The police did nothing wrong that we know of.
		
Click to expand...

I didnâ€™t say the police did on this occasion,did I ?
Iâ€™m sure someoneâ€™s responsible as others have mentioned.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 24, 2018)

We seem to have forgotten that the police said that there may not have been any drones involved at all.
How do they explain arresting a drone owner near to the airport if there was no drones.
As I said earlier, this whole business is very fishy.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

pokerjoke said:



			I didnâ€™t say the police did on this occasion,did I ?
Iâ€™m sure someoneâ€™s responsible as others have mentioned.
		
Click to expand...

Thatâ€™s why I asked who.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 24, 2018)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We seem to have forgotten that the police said that there may not have been any drones involved at all.
How do they explain arresting a drone owner near to the airport if there was no drones.
As I said earlier, this whole business is very fishy.
		
Click to expand...

Because at that stage they did feel it was a drone. Stop using hindsight to judge.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 24, 2018)

Doon frae Troon said:



			We seem to have forgotten that the police said that there may not have been any drones involved at all.
How do they explain arresting a drone owner near to the airport if there was no drones.
As I said earlier, this whole business is very fishy.
		
Click to expand...

No one has forgotten anything and maybe you need to read the news a bit clearer 

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


----------



## User2021 (Dec 24, 2018)

Who actually spotted these alleged drones?

Thousands of people in and around the airport, vast majority with a smart phone - yet whilst allegedly going on no videos or pictures on social media. 

Now days later, with a heavy police, security, army presence and a lot of cctv allegedly a damaged drone turns up by the perimeter just by chance.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Dec 24, 2018)

howbow88 said:



			As I already alluded to, I do know some details that are not in the public domain on this. The police do not come out of this well. 

But you guys go on telling everyone what a great job the police have done. Merry Christmas 

Click to expand...

So you know the arrested couple and you know stuff presumably not in the public domain, I guess this information has come from them. Do you not think there is a chance they might be slightly hacked off as a result and possibly exaggerating some of their experiences? I'm sure the police have followed procedures and done everything by the book.


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 24, 2018)

drive4show said:



			So you know the arrested couple and you know stuff presumably not in the public domain, I guess this information has come from them. Do you not think there is a chance they might be slightly hacked off as a result and possibly exaggerating some of their experiences? I'm sure the police have followed procedures and done everything by the book.
		
Click to expand...

Sweeping statement there Gordy,on many occasions they have not.
Do you have inside info?


----------



## TheDiablo (Dec 24, 2018)

drive4show said:



			So you know the arrested couple and you know stuff presumably not in the public domain, I guess this information has come from them. Do you not think there is a chance they might be slightly hacked off as a result and possibly exaggerating some of their experiences? I'm sure the police have followed procedures and done everything by the book.
		
Click to expand...

Out of interest, what makes you so sure? 

Police make thousands of procedural mistakes every year, and in high profile cases this can lead to life changing consequences for everyone involved.


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Dec 24, 2018)

TheDiablo said:



			Out of interest, what makes you so sure?
		
Click to expand...

I'm not, I just made it up ðŸ˜‰


----------



## pokerjoke (Dec 24, 2018)

drive4show said:



			I'm not, I just made it up ðŸ˜‰
		
Click to expand...

Becoming a habit


----------



## Deleted Member 1156 (Dec 24, 2018)

pokerjoke said:



			Becoming a habit 

Click to expand...

But maybe I'm not, perhaps I have a close friend in Sussex CID ðŸ™‚


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 24, 2018)

Should be going after the press for damages not the police (which Iâ€™m sure they will as itâ€™s entirely the pressâ€™ fault)

Iâ€™d advise them donâ€™t book any trips to America though.. wonâ€™t get a esta with an arrest technically for an act of terrorism.. even with no charges.. have to apply for a visa lol what a stupid country.


----------



## Dibby (Dec 24, 2018)

pauljames87 said:



			Should be going after the press for damages not the police (which Iâ€™m sure they will as itâ€™s entirely the pressâ€™ fault)

Iâ€™d advise them donâ€™t book any trips to America though.. wonâ€™t get a esta with an arrest technically for an act of terrorism.. even with no charges.. have to apply for a visa lol what a stupid country.
		
Click to expand...

It depends what they were actually arrested for at the time. It's not unreasonable that the arrest was for a relatively minor offence and they would have hoped to pin the serious stuff on when it came to laying charges. If so it's possible it wasn't a crime that would be considered "moral turpitude", that said, with no charges, let alone conviction, obtaining a B2 would be a fairly reasonable probability, so they may end up with a better option (lasts longer, has longer trip duration and more rights)  than ESTA for US trips. Not sure I'd want to go through what they have for that "benefit" though!


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 24, 2018)

Sad news from Gatwick this evening.........


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 25, 2018)

Jeso, what next a suicide Santa para glider


----------



## clubchamp98 (Dec 25, 2018)

Kellfire said:



			By who? The police did nothing wrong that we know of.
		
Click to expand...

Who told the press they had been arrested?

If that information came from a police source then they are just as much to blame as the rags!
If not then no blame on police , but they may have a leak.


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 25, 2018)

clubchamp98 said:



			Who told the press they had been arrested?

If that information came from a police source then they are just as much to blame as the rags!
If not then no blame on police , but they may have a leak.
		
Click to expand...

Iâ€™d bet a leak.


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 8, 2019)

And now it's the turn of Heathrow.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jan 8, 2019)

I said at the time of the Gatwick fiasco there would be copy cat attacks and it was obvious Heathrow would be a prime target. I hope the police handle their enquiries better than before and call for military help if needed much earlier


----------



## Old Skier (Jan 8, 2019)

HomerJSimpson said:



			I said at the time of the Gatwick fiasco there would be copy cat attacks and it was obvious Heathrow would be a prime target. I hope the police handle their enquiries better than before and call for military help if needed much earlier
		
Click to expand...

They had time to install their own gear, if they haven't someone needs sacking.


----------



## clubchamp98 (Jan 8, 2019)

Old Skier said:



			They had time to install their own gear, if they haven't someone needs sacking.
		
Click to expand...

Anti aircraft gun would do !


----------



## need_my_wedge (Jan 9, 2019)

Does this not just open it up to idiots calling in a sighting. I'm not saying there wasn't a drone in the vicinity, but surely anyone wanting to cause disruption and mayhem only has to call a couple of sightings in....


----------



## howbow88 (Jun 14, 2020)

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-53041256


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Jun 14, 2020)

howbow88 said:



https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-53041256

Click to expand...

Wow. Sounds a poorly investigated and carried out case. Sounds like someone with a major grudge tried dropping them in it


----------



## howbow88 (Jun 14, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			And if so, they will have judged that tiny morsel against the ongoing situation and taken a calculated gamble.

Being arrested infers no guilt. *If they do take legal action, then theyâ€™re idiots*.
		
Click to expand...

This really proved to be a silly post


----------

