|
Gatwick Drone and the Regiment
I gather that the "army" protecting Gatwick were Regiment. [There's a surprise!]
I am astounded that MoD have announced withdrawal of same. Does PR trump OPSEC these days? I cannot for the life of me see a logical reason for publicising end of military protection. |
If you are concerned about OPSEC....by announcing the termination of an Operation....were you as concerned about the publication of the start and conduct of the same Operation?
|
Originally Posted by SASless
(Post 10351071)
If you are concerned about OPSEC....by announcing the termination of an Operation....were you as concerned about the publication of the start and conduct of the same Operation?
By announcing departure we have lost both. [Incidentally the army appear to get maximum credit, and the Regiment will be criticised if matters go tits up again.] |
And how can you be sure that the report the soldiers are leaving is true and not a deliberate lie to lull the offenders into a false sense of security and see if they bring their toys out again?
The SAS have an on going role in aviation security, including hi jacks etc. they have had since the seventies to my knowledge. |
Over in the colonies, the last news that was even reported was the London mayor confirming that there might not have been any drones at all, right underneath the report that the only 2 people detained had been released without charges. Except for those directly involved, there seems to be a collective yawn in progress on this side of the pond.
I got lased twice on approach in the same city just a few days after the Gatwick UFO sightings, but I'm pretty sure nobody cares about that either :) |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 10351086)
[Incidentally the army appear to get maximum credit, and the Regiment will be criticised if matters go tits up again.]
|
The airlines and the airports are having to dig deep to pay for new kit - which they should have had anyway
It's not the RAF Regiments job to provide 24/7 coverage for people who can pay - if it did occur it wasn't a terrorist or military act anyway |
I spent a happy few hours trying to get the Beeb report corrected, with reference to which bit of the military had been involved, and which kit had been deployed.
MoD did confirm to me that it was indeed the Rocks involved (not the Pongoes). I also understand that the Rafael 'Drone Dome' kit has not yet been delivered - so presumably it was Horizon, or somesuch. If you check the latest version of the Beeb report (3 Jan), you'll see they have made the corrections. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46741687 airsound |
These little beauties are doing the rounds on FaceBook: http://i68.tinypic.com/350ncb6.jpg http://i66.tinypic.com/xkp3kh.jpg |
Gatwick and Heathrow buying anti-drone equipment Gatwick and Heathrow are to spend millions of pounds on anti-drone technology following the disruption at the Sussex airport before Christmas. Gatwick and Heathrow have not disclosed the equipment they plan to use in future. A Gatwick spokeswoman confirmed the airport had invested in new anti-drone defences after the disruption. |
Originally Posted by airsound
(Post 10351903)
I spent a happy few hours trying to get the Beeb report corrected, with reference to which bit of the military had been involved, and which kit had been deployed.
MoD did confirm to me that it was indeed the Rocks involved (not the Pongoes). I also understand that the Rafael 'Drone Dome' kit has not yet been delivered - so presumably it was Horizon, or somesuch. If you check the latest version of the Beeb report (3 Jan), you'll see they have made the corrections. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46741687 airsound Great work AS! It is amazing the complete horsesh1t that comes from HM Gov, MoD, Police etc... Are all "official" agencies completely immune to some accountability? := OAP |
I fear so.
We have become a banana republic. Incompetence has become the acceptable norm. The pursuit of excellence is derided. |
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 10351319)
Over in the colonies, the last news that was even reported was the London mayor confirming that there might not have been any drones at all,
PDR |
Zing! Caught a big one :)
You see, it was the "UK Police" at London Gatwick. Because as far as US media is concerned, Gatwick is in London and the UK is so small there is only one "UK Police" organization. https://www.businessinsider.com/poli...report-2018-12 Here's another slightly more informative actual riveting news report also dated 24 Dec. Can't seem to find anything about it after that. Not kidding this time. https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/24/uk-p...-released.html |
Well it is the UK.....and sorry....but it is a small. place....really!
It is called LGW you know.....like London/Gatwick. I night stopped there whenever possible so as to hit the "Curry Inn" in Horley followed by a longish visit to the Six Bells Pub. Don't blame the American Media.....Journalism school is for those who cannot qualify for any other degree. |
I spent 2 years living in Cambridge, loved it. Learned enough to "miss" the UK from just a decade or two ago. Maybe I'm just dreaming but I'm hoping Brexit will help the UK recapture their own unique spirit. I'm probably wrong but it was the history and heritage of the UK that I most loved and missed after I left.
|
For me a Google News search for Sadiq Khan and drones turns up... Nothing. Can you provide a link?
|
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 10352263)
I spent 2 years living in Cambridge, loved it. Learned enough to "miss" the UK from just a decade or two ago. Maybe I'm just dreaming but I'm hoping Brexit will help the UK recapture their own unique spirit. I'm probably wrong but it was the history and heritage of the UK that I most loved and missed after I left.
Start an new thread, perhaps in nostalgia 'I loved Cambridge, history and heritage ' |
Originally Posted by flensr
(Post 10351319)
I got lased twice on approach in the same city just a few days after the Gatwick UFO sightings, but I'm pretty sure nobody cares about that either :)
I hope you reported the attacks as required by EC 376/2014, MOR etc? I’m told the Laser WG had to convince the Govt the problem was under-reported before anything got moving. |
Quote: Originally Posted by langleybaston [Incidentally the army appear to get maximum credit, and the Regiment will be criticised if matters go tits up again.] I was under the impression it was 14th Sigs that were deployed to Gatwick...? Don't blame the American Media.....Journalism school is for those who cannot qualify for any other degree. |
It is as if there is a news blackout over the "crisis".
Either that or there is nothing to report .......... no progress by plod. As days go by the lack of evidence except eyewitnesses [reliable or unreliable] must surely lead us to deploy Occam's Razor and the dictum of Sherlock Holmes. |
http://www.gov.uk/government/news/ds...st-hostile-uas
I guess 3 1/2 years isn't long enough for the trial results to bear fruit, in terms of procurement? Pm |
Oh it's long enough - the problem is finding the cash to do anything about any recommendations - so the report stays "pending" until someone figures out what weasel words can be used to avoid actually doing anything................
|
This thread reveals the extent of the Crabs inferiority complex and that they still believe that Pprune Mil Aviation is all about them. |
Originally Posted by Clockwork Mouse
(Post 10353475)
This thread reveals the extent of the Crabs inferiority complex and that they still believe that Pprune Mil Aviation is all about them. Which unit? |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 10352890)
It is as if there is a news blackout over the "crisis".
Either that or there is nothing to report .......... no progress by plod. As days go by the lack of evidence except eyewitnesses [reliable or unreliable] must surely lead us to deploy Occam's Razor and the dictum of Sherlock Holmes. |
If the Government as whole, MOD Dept of transport and branches of the military along with the owners of LHR and LGW all behaved in a tardy and inefficient manner then it surely will result in a mass cover up as they all back each other up. It is however very much an example of UL 2018/9 that people do not do the bleedin' obvious usually because some accountant has ruled theres no business case for it or it doesnt 'drive incremental revenues' (and therefore my bonus as CEO where spending a few million is a cost and that negatively affects my businesses as CEO. In fact it probably a certainty that neither CEO has 'keep airport operating in all reasonable circumstances as an objective anyway' . Protection from drones is certainly within today's world of reasonable circumstances.
I do not blame the military that much though, they do what they are asked and if no one asked them to prepare for this threat it is not their fault but it does show a stunning degree of unpreparedness for something thats been discussed on here -just one example-for years. |
A56, don’t forget that the first recommendation of any DSTL research is...... more research. My understanding is that the aim of Bristow 15 was not to find a specific solution (there isn’t one to fit all scenarios) but to understand the technology of what is being pushed by industry. More importantly, with many ‘snake oil’ salesmen and women out there, there is a lot of work required to understand what the glossy mags say kit can do versus the reality of what the tech actually delivers. (Recall Mine detectors that were actually devices for finding golf balls.) Bristow 15 and the more recent 18, plus a myriad of other trials have gone a long way to understanding what the necessary requirements for a counter-UAS solution should be and ultimately make MoD an intelligent customer (shocker!). Now many would think that the solution for a capability to identify and disable a ‘drone’ would be relatively simple, you would have expected companies who produce complex platforms such as the QEC or F35 or even companies that produce the various DAS components would have generated a robust fix already - they haven’t. However, various agencies inc the Regt are considerably further down the road in understanding what can be fielded, it is just a question of $€£ to keep the project(s) going. Again my understanding is that multiple agencies, OGDs and FLCs have all supported activity to address the risks associated with drones of all catergories, at a tactical level there has been some superb cooperation but as one of the posts alludes too, this is not a quick fix and the money and continuity of personnel required to see the various strands of R&D through to a conclusion is just not there! Maybe for 2019, post ‘Gatwick-Gate’, a small amount of money may now be forthcoming and allow the work done to date to be full exploited. Or B, the cheque is in the post......... |
Originally Posted by pax britanica
(Post 10353495)
If the Government as whole, MOD Dept of transport and branches of the military along with the owners of LHR and LGW all behaved in a tardy and inefficient manner then it surely will result in a mass cover up as they all back each other up. It is however very much an example of UL 2018/9 that people do not do the bleedin' obvious usually because some accountant has ruled theres no business case for it or it doesnt 'drive incremental revenues' (and therefore my bonus as CEO where spending a few million is a cost and that negatively affects my businesses as CEO. In fact it probably a certainty that neither CEO has 'keep airport operating in all reasonable circumstances as an objective anyway' . Protection from drones is certainly within today's world of reasonable circumstances.
I do not blame the military that much though, they do what they are asked and if no one asked them to prepare for this threat it is not their fault but it does show a stunning degree of unpreparedness for something thats been discussed on here -just one example-for years. |
t is as if there is a news blackout over the "crisis". Either that or there is nothing to report .......... no progress by plod. |
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 10351067)
I gather that the "army" protecting Gatwick were Regiment. [There's a surprise!]
Originally Posted by parabellum
(Post 10351253)
The SAS have an on going role in aviation security, including hi jacks etc. they have had since the seventies to my knowledge.
Originally Posted by airsound
(Post 10351903)
I
MoD did confirm to me that it was indeed the Rocks involved (not the Pongoes). |
“...won the battle of Gatwick“. So this was a victory??
|
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 10353204)
Oh it's long enough - the problem is finding the cash to do anything about any recommendations - so the report stays "pending" until someone figures out what weasel words can be used to avoid actually doing anything................
|
Originally Posted by langleybaston
(Post 10353480)
So it was the army that won the Battle of Gatwick 2018 was it?
Which unit? Will the Middle Ginger Stepchild of the UK Armed Forces - sorry - 2 Armed Forces and and Part-time Civvy Detachment ever get over itself? |
Originally Posted by Clockwork Mouse
(Post 10353475)
This thread reveals the extent of the Crabs inferiority complex and that they still believe that Pprune Mil Aviation is all about them. gijoe - Happy New Year to you too. |
Seems clear, RAF Regiment: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-46741687 |
Doesn't really matter does it? The Military responded to a request for help, did a good job and left in time for Christmas. Good effort by those involved, regardless of the colour of their uniforms.
|
Well said handle. Shall we start a campaign for inter service civility? |
I'm sorry Timelord, but you should have waited almost four months to post that.....!
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:21. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.