I wonder just how realistic the threat is to aviation from drones really is.
Sure, the panic-stricken and incompetent hysteria we saw last month tells us lots about the percieved threat and the ineptitude of the authorities but nothing about the real hazard.
Just how much damage can a drone really do to an airliner if you were a perp and wanted to try?
I suspect you'd be pretty disappointed.
A 2-3 Kg drone is about a big as big s hey get
afaik and thus are reasonably in line with birdstrike standards, are they not? OK a goose is soft and a drone has harder bits but is that really a major difference?
What damage is a drone going to do to an airlliner that could threaten it? It would take massive luck and skilful piolting to drive one into an engine or a wiondscreen at all, even that is pretty difficult to achieve at low speed right on the runway, but engines are designed to take geese and unless you take out both simultaneously on t/o just what is the real hazard?
Even a drone loaded with a KG or two of explosives is unlikely to guarantee much damage - military missiles routinely require a vastly greater kinetic hit plus a much bigger warhead.
The propaganda effect may well be massive if we stupidly allow the scrotes the oxygen of publicity but just how serious in reality is the threat to life and limb in aviation?
So what, exactly, are we panicking about?