Drones....

[mushroom25]

the subject of drones has been aired before in this forum, with the majority consensus being that the authorities should stop being drama queens, grow some and let drone flyers get on with managing their own affairs.

so would it be fair to say that AB consider Gatwick Airport to have "over reacted" last night?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-sussex-46623754

[ludwig]

Something will have to get done at some point (licensing or whatever) because this is going to happen more and more.

[AuntLydia]

We have jet fighters come over our fields very low, we have huge helicopters come over our fields in convoys very low. The horses never lift their heads from the grass. An Air ambulance once landed in a field nearby they could not have cared less. Drones are different, they 'creep up' on animals, bit like people on bikes when you are riding on the roads. The last one spooked the horses and spooked the sheep and it was a lambing time. Kval -maybe your 'stock' is used to you mucking about now with a drone and they are used to it. Not all anials are.

[kvalidir]

They shouldn't be flying them so low that they are bothering your stock AL, that's honestly a rude or uneducated controller, we can nip about anywhere and the first thing we do is do a high level reccie as to what stock is where so we can adjust our altitude so as not to bother them unduly. You'll never get rid of *** people unfortunately, but it's them like the idiot at Gatwick who give everyone else a bad name x

[Old_Geezer]

Regardless of a desire to identify, shooting down the drone is less disruption than closing the airport and flights. And it proves costly to the idiot flying the drone. But again I would have figured detectors, triangulating where the control signal was coming from, ought to be possible.

[ChillDoubt]

Silliest OP I’ve seen all week?
Over reaction? I’d rather not see one of these things strike a cockpit or get sucked into an engine of a plane I was in that was taking off/landing thanks very much but if you’d be happy with that mushroom, crack on!

[New Judge]

"...shooting down the drone is less disruption than closing the airport and flights."

It's also extremely difficult if not well nigh impossible, especially in the dark as it was when this business began last night. To effectively "Shoot down" a drone flying at a few hundred feet a rifle would be necessary (accompanied by an extremely accomplished marksman). A shotgun, even with heavy gauge shot or slugs, whilst requiring less accuracy, would not be effective enough to disable a drone at much beyond about 150 to 200 feet. It ain't really as easy as it seems to be on the telly!

[dannyk13]

NJ, it would be easy for the RAF.

[bhg481]

I didn't hear the report but my wife, listening to the radio, just shouted upstairs to tell me that drones are classed as aircraft and, as such, it's illegal to shoot them down.

[ChillDoubt]

Just to give a sense os scale/size of these things:

I would not like to see that going into the jet intake of a plane I was in!

[New Judge]

"NJ, it would be easy for the RAF...."

Using what method, danny? If you're thinking of perhaps tackling the drone with a helicopter gunship I may be with you. With a fixed wing aircraft it would be almost impossible. So we're back to "surface to air" interception. And that ignores the problem that the drone may be gone when the RAF arrive on the scene only to reappear when they have left.

[dannyk13]

bhg Apparently it is not illegal for an authorised perso to shoot down a drone:-
//Gatwick chief operating officer Chris Woodroofe said police decided to not shoot down the drones at the airport with firearms because of "what might happen with stray bullets."//

[ChillDoubt]

NJ, it would be easy for the RAF.
————-
Utter rubbish. How many rounds do you think you’d need to hit an object that size? 150 minimum I’d guess.
Could you imagine AAA of that amount being fired above a commercial runway, especially one the size of Gatwick? With that amount of commercial airliners around?
The potential for collateral damage is huge and beyond catastrophic.
They might be able to do it via ECM but then there’s also a risk to other aircraft.

[dannyk13]

Chilldoubt // 150 rounds//
Utter rubbish, one rocket locked on is all that is necessary.

[ChillDoubt]

How many rounds do you think that 7 barrelled system fired in a few short seconds danny?

[dannyk13]

Chillpoubt, see post at 12.43

[ChillDoubt]

Chilldoubt // 150 rounds//
Utter rubbish, one rocket locked on is all that is necessary.
————-
Can you remember the last time an AA missile got ‘accidentally’ locked on to a commercial aircraft danny?

[spathiphyllum]

They could always deploy a counter drone with a big net to go and catch the other drone. Worst comes to worst they get chased out the restricted zone, win win.

[ludwig]

We need something like this, but for drones instead of pigeons. I'll let Klunk explain it..

[dannyk13]

Chilldoubt, all aircraft at Gatwick are grounded due to this drone.

[kvalidir]

I can't see why Airports couldn't be equipped with something to hijack the Drone's frequency and land it though. That could be legislated into new manufacture and purchase. That'd stop 'em dead in their tracks.