This is certain to have a negative impact (No pun intended, it is serious).
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-46540592
I confess, I have great difficulty understanding the mindset of a person who would do this sort of thing.
Could this have been the result of a flyaway?
If so, then perhaps legislation will control the range of drones so they cannot fly far enough to enter restricted areas. What a disasterous effect. 1 total idiot spoils all the hard work of safe flyers.
So sad.

10.000 ft height....UFO?   wich consumer drone can fly that high?

JJBspark Posted at 12-15 11:50
10.000 ft height....UFO?   wich consumer drone can fly that high?

It can be easily a DJI drone, that’s been hacked and the altitude limit was removed.

Flysafely
Alex

But seriously, in my opinion people that do that, fly close to the planes near the airports are, f@cking stupid people!!! Those people need to have the drones confiscated from them and have a lifetime ban on drone flying!

Flysafely
Alex

Thats one hell of a flyaway!!

Alex B. Posted at 12-15 12:04
It can be easily a DJI drone, that’s been hacked and the altitude limit was removed.

Flysafely

oke, i believe you  :-)  i am not into hacking software to fly high!  60 - 80 meters height is great for pictures and videos.

And yes, not a clever person   if it was a drone ofcourse.

cheers
JJB

Shame the operator wasn't caught, jail time is the only answer for such stupidity.

The future of our hobby is dark enough. More and more restrictions will come

JJBspark Posted at 12-15 12:20
oke, i believe you  :-)  i am not into hacking software to fly high!  60 - 80 meters height is great for pictures and videos.

And yes, not a clever person   if it was a drone ofcourse.

I agree, there is no proof it was actually a drone. However, there doesn't need to be proof. It is in the news, that is what readers will believe.

You don't really need to hack the software ... Just go and buy "Mavic FPV" app
Its nothing to do with DJI and will more or less let you do anything you want with your Maivc

Mavic_Jay Posted at 12-15 15:36
You don't really need to hack the software ... Just go and buy "Mavic FPV" app
Its nothing to do with DJI and will more or less let you do anything you want with your Maivc

I was under the impression the 500 meter limit was built into the drone, not the app. The hack is for the drone software isn't it?

When I read an article like this I often think; "written by people who hate drones", or "headlines sells". In this case, I miss a sensible proof, especially as there should be more events with the same Unidentified Flying Object. Yes, I actually mean UFO because how can a crew member in any way realize that it was a small drone passing the plane?

During approach to landing, after all, there is still some momentum on the plane - I assume between 250 and 350 km/h or maybe even more at 3 km of height. The UFO size and flight speed taken into consideration, the crew member with the supervision only had a fraction of a second to see what that tiny thing was. Such claims must be documented with video, which should not be a problem.

I generally refuse to believe in stories like this, unless the evidence is in place.

Mavic_Jay Posted at 12-15 15:36
You don't really need to hack the software ... Just go and buy "Mavic FPV" app
Its nothing to do with DJI and will more or less let you do anything you want with your Maivc

I think the only way of removing the 500 meters top altitude limit is by downgrading your drones firmware and modifiying the parameters in DJI assistant 2 + there is some other stuff involved as using dumbldore for example. It’s too techy for me at the moment so I don’t wanna risk it and by accident mess up my drone.

Flysafely
Alex

JJBspark Posted at 12-15 11:50
10.000 ft height....UFO?   wich consumer drone can fly that high?

A Mavic 2 can fly this height all dji drones can fly left right forward backwards up and down the same distance, just dji have a limiter onthe height a drone can be flown most max out at 500 metres, but some have chosen to jailbreak their drones.

''Could this have been the result of a flyaway?''

Possibly.  

One thing is for sure - Anyone who lost a drone near Essex, it would not be good time to put up posters saying: Lost Drone!  Have you seen my drone?  Reward for Return.

FlyDK Posted at 12-15 15:55
When I read an article like this I often think; "written by people who hate drones", or "headlines sells". In this case, I miss a sensible proof, especially as there should be more events with the same Unidentified Flying Object. Yes, I actually mean UFO because how can a crew member in any way realize that it was a small drone passing the plane?

During approach to landing, after all, there is still some momentum on the plane - I assume between 250 and 350 km/h or maybe even more at 3 km of height. The UFO size and flight speed taken into consideration, the crew member with the supervision only had a fraction of a second to see what that tiny thing was. Such claims must be documented with video, which should not be a problem.

After seeing a video (couple of frames) of a flight of birds blowing past aircraft on landing, with possibility that starboard engine ingested one of birds - I question ability of naked eye to distinguish between UFO / Drone.

And public should not assume a Drone was being flown by John Q. Public.  Governments do a lot of things behind public's back.  Like selling weapons to drug lords, and fanatical regimes.

If a dji drone can reach 10,000 ft then where does one purchase the magic battery?

A weather balloon Radiosonde can, however, reach such an altitude (I used to launch and radar track them to much higher).

So 'something' whizzes past the cockpit nowadays then it's a drone. 50 years ago it was called a 'UFO' but reporting such an incident nowadays is an instant referral to the 'head doctor' and a black mark on one's flight record so maybe it's more convenient to report a drone than a garbage bag hot air balloon or a radiosonde.

Maybe a flight-cam should be installed into cockpits!

I hope they find the moron and throw him in prison for a long time - losing his home, job and access to his children. Sorted!

AlansDronePics Posted at 12-15 14:25
I agree, there is no proof it was actually a drone. However, there doesn't need to be proof. It is in the news, that is what readers will believe.

this is why we need to educate the media instead of punishing the drone communities.    the media consistently demonized drones and basically treats us as a collective looking to down planes, spy on others and just general chaos. they couldnt even confirm it wasnt a bird, or a peice of garbage or debris or somethign else...instantly assume drone and demonize us "totally unacceptable"
im sure not even 0.1% of the people in the media even know how safe and compliant these drones are currently or how easy they are to fly safely.

Boffin Posted at 12-15 20:50
If a dji drone can reach 10,000 ft then where does one purchase the magic battery?

A weather balloon Radiosonde can, however, reach such an altitude (I used to launch and radar track them to much higher).

with jailbroken dji drone, the max ceiling is estimated 16,500 feet based on population system capabilities and air resistance for the props to bite into and keep it aloft..   it would be very hard to climb from sea level to 10,000+ feet with a spark or a mavic air "safely"  with enough power and wind resistance to then safely return back.. but a mavic pro, mavic 2, or phantom 4 pro, inspire series probably wouldn't even see that climb as much of a challenge

A CW Posted at 12-16 00:32
I hope they find the moron and throw him in prison for a long time - losing his home, job and access to his children. Sorted!

just instantly assume they unverified flying object was not a bird or bit of debris from another aircraft or something?   like they couldn't verify it was or wasn't a drone.. the media just hears that its possible by some remote chance a drone if you squint hard enough then they jump on it.  chances are..more likely than not a bird or piece of debris..both of which are far far more common in the air than drones.   you are 100's of thousands of times more likely to strike a bird or piece of debris than you are to strike a drone..infact funny story i had a bird strike with my drone xD i also been flyign when was mild winds and nearly got a plastic bag caught in my blades...  but ya know what i never almost hit...another drone

i believe fully that we need to educate the media to stop demonizing this ..... and start verifying claims first.  im half curious if i can make a false claim edit a video up of a drone strike, and submit ti to various news stations if they will eat it up and take the bait

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 00:55
just instantly assume they unverified flying object was not a bird or bit of debris from another aircraft or something?   like they couldn't verify it was or wasn't a drone.. the media just hears that its possible by some remote chance a drone if you squint hard enough then they jump on it.  chances are..more likely than not a bird or piece of debris..both of which are far far more common in the air than drones.   you are 100's of thousands of times more likely to strike a bird or piece of debris than you are to strike a drone..

i believe fully that we need to educate the media to stop demonizing this ..... and start verifying claims first.  im half curious if i can make a false claim edit a video up of a drone strike, and submit ti to various news stations if they will eat it up and take the bait

IF it was a drone I stand by what I stated to the LETTER sunshine!

A CW Posted at 12-16 00:57
IF it was a drone and stand by what I stated to the LETTER sunshine!

if it was, sure.. but best of luck verifying it.. chances are if it wasn't a drone though and gets verified as something else....  the media will drop it and pretend they never reported on it..just leave on the demonizing because of their agendas..  until then they going to fill in gaps of information with BS and demonize it

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 00:59
if it was, sure.. but best of luck verifying it.. chances are if it wasn't a drone though and gets verified as something else....  the media will drop it and pretend they never reported on it..just leave on the demonizing because of their agendas..  until then they going to fill in gaps of information with BS and demonize it

What do you mean best of luck verifying it? I'm not verifying anything - that is the job of the authorities here in my country where this extremely dangerous criminal act took place. I can assure you that it will be verified by them and when they find the stupid, half wit loser they should lock him up and throw away the key... IF that was a drone it could have killed people - that makes this a terrorist incident IMO - especially given that your own President landed in Air Force One at this airport when he visited the UK.

A CW Posted at 12-16 00:57
IF it was a drone I stand by what I stated to the LETTER sunshine!

also does this description sound like a drone ?  what drone appears as a square or rectangle without separation.. even inspire 2 or matrice which maybe most "squared" drones have seperation.
--------------------------------------
The first officer then saw "a dark-coloured square or rectangle-shaped object pass down the right side of the aircraft with minimal separation".
----------------
then follow it up with:  
-----
The UK Airprox Board rated the risk of collision as the highest possible.

After the incident, which happened at 16:36 BST, the plane was inspected on the ground and found no evidence of contact or damage.
------------------------

okay so first bit, rating collision risk as highest...ill accept better to be safe vs sorry..  but the last bit proves was pointless in the end...

pilot mentions a drone then discribes debris or a bird or something...and media demonizes drones..   #Logic  ?

A CW Posted at 12-16 01:04
What do you mean best of luck verifying it? I'm not verifying anything - that is the job of the authorities here in my country where this extremely dangerous criminal act took place. I can assure you that it will be verified by them and when they find the stupid, half wit loser they should lock him up and throw away the key... IF that was a drone it could have killed people - that makes this a terrorist incident IMO - especially given that your own President landed in Air Force One at this airport when he visited the UK.

your saying that a piece of debris committed a crime because thats what the pilot described..

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 01:05
also does this description sound like a drone ?  what drone appears as a square or rectangle without separation.. even inspire 2 or matrice which maybe most "squared" drones have seperation.

The first officer then saw "a dark-coloured square or rectangle-shaped object pass down the right side of the aircraft with minimal separation".

As long as you accept that IF this was a drone then the pilot is a criminal and needs locking up then that's fine. I don't think the BBC editors read this forum so what you and I right on here about the media getting it right is futile - they will always right what they like.

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 01:08
your saying that a piece of debris committed a crime because thats what the pilot described..

Have you verified it? Clever boy!

A CW Posted at 12-16 01:08
As long as you accept that IF this was a drone then the pilot is a criminal and needs locking up then that's fine. I don't think the BBC editors read this forum so what you and right on here about the media getting it right is futile - they will always right what they like.

even if they did read it, its against their agenda, obviously.... so wouldn't change anything.  they completely ignored logic and critical thinking and instantly jumped on the word "drone"

if they took 2 second or less to just analyze the description and used critical thinking then chances that it is a drone is slim..

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 01:11
even if they did read it, its against their agenda, obviously.... so wouldn't change anything.  they completely ignored logic and critical thinking and instantly jumped on the word "drone"

if they took 2 second or less to just analyze the description and used critical thinking then chances that it is a drone is slim..

No, they spent 4 seconds on how to make money and headlines - they are journalists - that is what they do.

A CW Posted at 12-16 01:10
Have you verified it? Clever boy!

i dont need to...just read the description the pilot himself gave    "a dark-coloured square or rectangle-shaped object pass down the right side of the aircraft with minimal separation""  does that sound like a drone or some debris?

just because pilot said drone..doesn't make it a drone.. if you told me you saw a drone on you kitchen counter then proceeded to discribe  your refrigerator when i ask for a description of what it looked like.. im not going to assume it was a drone....

A CW Posted at 12-16 01:12
No, they spent 4 seconds on how to make money and headlines - they are journalists - that is what they do.

exactly, they dont actually care about our hobby or careers or reputation as drone pilots.  

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 01:19
exactly, they dont actually care about our hobby or careers or reputation as drone pilots.

No they don't care. In fact, they only care about making a headline sell. 1,000 people could die in an Earthquake in the middle of nowhere on the same day an important politician resigns - guess which story makes the headlines... That's just how it is. And if the original story doesn't have enough spice they'll add some of their own.
'That could have been a drone right?' Well now it is in the eyes of the BBC until they are proved wrong and nobody will challenge it in a court room so they win. Not the first time and not the last either. There is also the possibility that is could have been a drone and that is their defence.

A CW Posted at 12-16 01:34
No they don't care. In fact, they only care about making a headline sell. 1,000 people could die in an Earthquake in the middle of nowhere on the same day an important politician resigns - guess which story makes the headlines... That's just how it is. And if the original story doesn't have enough spice they'll add some of their own.
'That could have been a drone right?' Well now it is in the eyes of the BBC until they are proved wrong and nobody will challenge it in a court room so they win. Not the first time and not the last either. There is also the possibility that is could have been a drone and that is their defence.

that's my point and its disgusting..   if there is a slight opportunity it maybe a drone in the media's eyes it is and it is the "enemy of the state" so to speak..

with so many trees, hills, buildings, open water, power lines, and just things between drone and critical airspace... i would argue that most of the undesirable people piloting are busy putting their drones in some of those things...well before ever get to vital airspace.  hell i watched a guy fly his pahntom 4 pro into a lighthouse once trying to circle it manually like POI.. like how did you screw that up?

HereForTheBeer Posted at 12-16 00:50
with jailbroken dji drone, the max ceiling is estimated 16,500 feet based on population system capabilities and air resistance for the props to bite into and keep it aloft..   it would be very hard to climb from sea level to 10,000+ feet with a spark or a mavic air "safely"  with enough power and wind resistance to then safely return back.. but a mavic pro, mavic 2, or phantom 4 pro, inspire series probably wouldn't even see that climb as much of a challenge

I suppose height will be a challenge some folk aspire to, but with unknown windspeed and temperature up there, failure and crashing where it shouldn't seems the likely outcome.

AlansDronePics Posted at 12-16 03:25
I suppose height will be a challenge some folk aspire to, but with unknown windspeed and temperature up there, failure and crashing where it shouldn't seems the likely outcome.

ya extremely high risk..  just 1 miles AGL is very high risk because edging on air mass boundaries... 2 miles and you are getting into the meat of air mass movements.. and depending on weather system could be putting your drone into a 80 MPH windsheer..

but the description sounds more like a drone carry case not a drone.. or a debris.  and i been thinking about most basic way to discribe a matrice series drone (most squared off looking drone i can imagine) and i would definitely use the words "mechanical looking "  and not "minimal separation"

Arthur C. Clarke saw the future - just 17 years later.

Lamplighter55 Posted at 12-16 09:04
Arthur C. Clarke saw the future - just 17 years later.

Who would have thought hindsight could be mistaken for foresight.