
UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones - JackPoach
https://techcrunch.com/2018/12/24/uk-police-release-airport-drone-suspects/
======
merricksb
Earlier discussion after release of suspects yesterday:

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18745624](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18745624)

------
Edd314159
> The suggestion there may not have been any drones at Gatwick Airport was a
> "miscommunication by police", a government source has told the BBC.

> During a conference call between ministers, chaired by Transport Secretary
> Chris Grayling, it was agreed the 67 drone sightings were legitimate.

([https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-
england-46670714](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46670714))

As much as "it was all a false alarm" would make a killer headline (and
clearly has, even in speculation), it doesn't seem that anyone actually
believes that. Just a poor choice of works.

~~~
chrisseaton
The Police in the UK often say the most ludicrous things in statements, and
the basic public speaking skills of the people they choose to put out is often
very limited. They always look like they're caught in the headlights while
trying to sweatily stumble through reading some words off a page.

I'm not sure what institutionally causes this, but it must be something
causing it as it's always the same.

Remember when recently a senior Police officer in a statement just decided to
call some extremely serious allegations they were looking into 'true' as if
they had already had the trial and preempting the whole judicial process? I
can't understand how you can accidentally 'misspeak' like that.

~~~
C1sc0cat
They don't hire the brightest - recently I heard a former senior ex met natsec
policeman who presented as very very stupid individual I would not trust to
investigate a missing kitten.

There was also the scandal where a v senior copper on the Cyber side was found
cheating.

~~~
ComputerGuru
In the USA, courts ruled it was legal for police departments to discriminate
based on intellect and refuse to higher persons with high IQs.

They hire less smart people on purpose because they tend to question orders
less and do what they are told more (their words, not mine).

~~~
hodgesrm
You should cite a source for that. Where I live the cops are pretty on the
ball. I recall one of them casually correcting my math on work-related problem
when he was taking a report from me on another topic.

~~~
firmgently
[https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-smart-to-be-a-
cop/](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-smart-to-be-a-cop/)
[https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-
cops/st...](https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-
cops/story?id=95836)

------
bigwheeler
I just still can’t wrap my head around the fact that in 2018, with a camera
attached to every waking persons hand (and some sleeping people too), how is
it that there is not a single public photo or video published of this specific
drone. Kind of reminds me of when I found out that tipping cows wasn’t a real
thing...

~~~
jsjohnst
> I just still can’t wrap my head around the fact that in 2018, with a camera
> attached to every waking persons hand (and some sleeping people too), how is
> it that there is not a single public photo or video published of this
> specific drone.

I’ve been in many debates about this in the drone flying community (and with
friends who know me and how much I fly) and I keep coming back to this point.
I’d even take a blurry “UFO sighting” photo under consideration, but even that
doesn’t exist.

Virtually every single “close call with a plane” has _thankfully_ (thankfully
both for the safety of passengers and for other UAV pilots who would be
impacted by the irresponsible party’s actions) been proven later to not have
been a drone.

PS, cow tipping is real (as in its “possible”, not that folks are successful),
but it’s much harder than folks realize (I grew up in a farm state and have
seen it done _once_ with multiple big guys involved, but also seen many a
drunken fool fall on their face trying too).

~~~
Dayshine
Here's a real report of a near-miss (20m) with a drone by an RAF fighter jet:
[https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standa...](https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/uploadedFiles/Content/Standard_content/Airprox_report_files/2018/Airprox%20Report%202018160.pdf)

~~~
jsjohnst
When you put military aircraft flying at high speed in class G airspace so
close to the ground, crap like this happens. I know the Tornado was
authorized, but as someone who grew up near a military base, it is abusive to
those in the area. This is a sore spot with me, so apologize I’m a bit bitter
on this.

To avoid situations like the above, I typically file a flight plan or at
minimum contact nearby ATC if I know I’m going to be flying above 200ft much.
That said, I’m not required too and neither was the drone pilot in this
incident either. I wouldn’t be opposed to a transponder, if they were made on
drones, but to date I don’t know of any major manufacturers providing that
feature.

------
alt_f4
They also claimed these drones were "industrial specification". How did they
determine that when they've never seen them?

There should be some sort of penalty for blatantly lying to the public, even
if it is done to save face about your incompetence.

~~~
Angostura
Who was "they" can you find the on-the-record comment that suggested this?

~~~
chrisseaton
The Police literally said 'industrial specification' on their own Twitter
feed.

[https://twitter.com/sussex_police/status/1075723025713127424](https://twitter.com/sussex_police/status/1075723025713127424)

------
barry0079
Not before plastering the faces of an innocent couple nationwide. I think they
deserve reparation for this.

~~~
redcalx
The paper's that did that made clearly libellous claims - because the couple
had not yet been charged with an offence when their names were published.
Those paper's can now expect libel claims against them, although given the
clear breach of libel law I expect they will wish to settle out of court
rather than take on the extra expense of a court case they can't win.

~~~
monochromatic
I’m not too familiar with UK libel law. Is it not a defense that they were
reporting on statements they were given? Is there a reasonableness question?

~~~
DanBC
There's a difference between saying "Mr and Mrs Bloggs were arrested in
connection to the Gatwick drone chaos" and "ARE THESE THE MORONS WHO RUINED
CHRISTMAS?" in 144pt font on the front page with a fuck-off huge photo of
them.

[http://suttonnick.tumblr.com/post/181330292801/hendopolis-
ma...](http://suttonnick.tumblr.com/post/181330292801/hendopolis-mail-on-
sunday-are-these-the-morons)

But this newspaper probably won't have to pay out anything. They've been
careful with their wording; they do this a lot; they have lawyers on staff;
and defamation is difficult in the UK.

------
sys_64738
When I read about this, the intense pressure the police were under, that they
arrested two people then released them due to iron clad alibis, it makes me
wonder if they panicked and tried to pin it on the first couple of people to
pass within their sights. Reading about English police corruption recently,
this doesn't surprise me if it were true.

------
Udik
Could it have been a mass psychosis? First a real drone sighting and the
closure of the airport; then when the news spread, tens of people reported
more sightings. There are two densely populated towns on both sides of Gatwick
airport, within a couple of kms from the runways. After the first sighting,
any other within that range must have been considered a risk worth closing the
airport for. A drone is just a black dot in the sky, I wouldn't be surprised
by false reports.

------
jfoster
"Despite going down the wrong avenue with the arrest, investigators do have
more to work with after they recovered a fallen and damaged drone from the
north side of the airport. It is being tested for clues on who piloted it,
according to The Guardian."

“always a possibility that there may not have been any genuine drone activity
in the first place.”

Don't these two contradict? The best consistency possible between them is that
the damaged drone was placed there rather than flown, at a different time. In
all likelihood it probably did crash, though. Given the timing of finding it,
it would seem related to this incident. Perhaps there should be some skyward-
facing CCTV-like cameras at airports to remove some ambiguity in situations
like this.

------
rasz
last time it turned out to be a shopping bag

[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/21/drone-
believed-t...](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/21/drone-believed-to-
have-hit-british-airways-flight-may-have-been/)

[https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/04/drone...](https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2016/04/drone-that-hit-british-airways-jet-was-likely-a-plastic-
bag/)

------
monochromatic
[https://frinkiac.com/meme/S08E16/1219284.jpg?b64lines=VEhBVC...](https://frinkiac.com/meme/S08E16/1219284.jpg?b64lines=VEhBVCdTIFNPTUUgR09PRApXT1JLLCBMT1Uu)

------
imron
And yet, from the article:

"investigators do have more to work with after they recovered a fallen and
damaged drone from the north side of the airport."

~~~
PavlovsCat
Which technically can mean a lot of things, that drone could have been there
for a while, and just been found when they combed everything for a drone.

~~~
redcalx
Indeed. If they can't link it to anyone or even any time, then it can't be
used as evidence. Although it may be a fruitful line of enquiry if was one of
the problem drones from last week. E.g. tracing sale of parts from serial
numbers.

------
jacquesm
So how was the link between non-existing drones and a very specific couple
made?

------
beerlord
The suggestion is that the airports were under major terrorism threat, which
is why the army was involved.

They didn't say this to avoid spooking the public, and having a whole lot of
people cancel their flights and holidays (plus it would have been major fuel
for the Yellow Vests).

~~~
benj111
The yellow vests, as in the protests in France? What's that got to do with
drones in the UK???

~~~
DanBC
There are some very small protests in the UK from people wearing Yellow Vests.
These appear to be from Brexit supporters.

Here's a video of some people blocking a bridge, causing delay to an ambo:
[https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/10735588338789621...](https://twitter.com/LeaveEUOfficial/status/1073558833878962176)

~~~
benj111
So Brexit supporters are copying French fuel protesters even though we have a
different fuel duty regime that isn't set by Europe, and they want to leave
Europe (and by extension, France) anyway?

That makes perfect sense.

~~~
jacquesm
For a real head twister: the various 'exit' and 'anti-eu' groups have tried to
unite EU wide... That one still has me wondering if they realize what they are
doing.

~~~
benj111
So they've formed a.... union?

~~~
jacquesm
If you squint a bit they formed a European Union ;)

------
tezza
This country ( UK ) is highly prone to mass psychosis. Not really ascribing
anything negative there, just an observation.

A few winters ago there was minute by minute updates on Bird Flu.

The press was covering swans and ducks found dead on the ground. Each
individual fowl corpse was covered in breathless detail amongst infographics
and timelines

The government was manoeuvred into buying close to a billion pounds of Tamiflu
treatment. Some of that was returned, but £500m wasn’t (thanks to commentators
below )

Tamiflu killed more people that the H5N1

So may more examples beyond this

~~~
DanBC
> The government was manoeuvred into buying £9 billion pounds of Tamiflu
> vaccine.

£9bn was about the total prescription medication budget at the time, so I
think you've gone wrong somewhere.

~~~
DanBC
The H5N1 scare was around 2008.

Some sourcing on the medication budget:
[https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/rising-cost-
medici...](https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/rising-cost-medicines-
nhs)

> Estimated total NHS spending on medicines in England has grown from £13
> billion in 2010/11 to £17.4 billion in 2016/17

A few years earlier in 2006:
[http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/casenotes_20060509.shtml](http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/science/casenotes_20060509.shtml)
(The transcript used to be available, not sure if it's possible to get to it
now, but that gives the £9bn figure).

