Another report of bad drone flying in the UK. A Mavic Pro by the looks.
Here.
Althought I doubt the 'Hundreds if meters' high part, you would not be able to see it, nor hear it to spot it at that height.
It also looks like the DJI geo-fencing was bypassed as I would have thought the drone should have refused to fly in such areas.

Tabloid press - how did they know the entire flight path of the drone if it and the pilot was never recovered/caught lol and 121m is 400', not 300' the last I checked... It was probably their own photographer flying it though I doubt there was a drone there. Take it with a pinch of salt.

Too much negativity in the press....

A J Posted at 4-7 23:40
Tabloid press - how did they know the entire flight path of the drone if it and the pilot was never recovered/caught lol and 121m is 400', not 300' the last I checked... It was probably their own photographer flying it though I doubt there was a drone there. Take it with a pinch of salt.

Well, it was on MSN news, so... what sort of person believes anything there?
Read the report again, it says 121m is 396 feet which is close enough to 397 feet. 121 x 3.281 = 397 not 300 feet as you claim.

AlansDronePics Posted at 4-8 00:43
Well, it was on MSN news, so... what sort of person believes anything there?
Read the report again, it says 121m is 396 feet which is close enough to 397 feet. 121 x 3.281 = 397 not 300 feet as you claim.

The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 meters (300 feet).

Suggest you read it again as just copied this from the article...

A J Posted at 4-8 00:45
The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 meters (300 feet).

Suggest you read it again as just copied this from the article...

The photographer, who snapped the drone on a long lens with a professional camera, estimated the height of the drone to be more than 300 metres (984ft).
The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 metres (396ft).

???

AlansDronePics Posted at 4-8 00:47
The photographer, who snapped the drone on a long lens with a professional camera, estimated the height of the drone to be more than 300 metres (984ft).
The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 metres (396ft).

I'm fully aware of that - which is my point. The article is incorrect in stating that the max height is 121m/300' - the 'journalist' does not even know that 121m is 400'... So I am not taking what that tabloid is writing seriously

It does not matter if we view it as fake news, which it does seem to be. Who can see a drone at 300+ meters high, without actually following it up and keeping track of it.
It matters that a lot of the general public wont reason it like the majority here, they will just see it as another reason to shackle drone pilots with more regulation.

Ken Storm Posted at 4-8 01:13
It does not matter if we view it as fake news, which it does seem to be. Who can see a drone at 300+ meters high, without actually following it up and keeping track of it.
It matters that a lot of the general public wont reason it like the majority here, they will just see it as another reason to shackle drone pilots with more regulation.

I think the only real way to stop this type of fake news is for a multi billion pound organisation like DJI to protect it's customers and business interests by taking newspapers like this to court but it will be so difficult to prove either way and very costly and DJI were not mentioned.
Unfortunately, all we can do is fly legally and safely and have the common sense to judge if an article is on point or a load of bull - this is clearly the latter. People will believe what they want to believe and as long as stories like this sell (and they will especially when connected to Royalty) then the media will continue to publish this crap and taking a derogatory approach to drones is more of a cash cow than emphasising how lives are saved with them etc. Let's not forget that the British tabloid papers killed Prince Harry's mother by hounding her...

A J Posted at 4-8 00:45
The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 meters (300 feet).

Suggest you read it again as just copied this from the article...

Maybe it’s been edited
I’m seeing this  

The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 metres (396ft).

Also copied from the article

AnzacJack Posted at 4-8 02:44
Maybe it’s been edited
I’m seeing this  

Strange as shows 300' on what I'm looking at...

AnzacJack Posted at 4-8 02:44
Maybe it’s been edited
I’m seeing this  

It seems they have corrected their error in the rewrite further down but this draft at the top of the article clearly shows Mirror shared services does not know the conversion between metres and feet lol

So weird.  There are a lot of differences in the text. We must have different versions for different regions

A drone pilot risked disaster by flying the device over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new country home in the middle of Heathrow's busy flight path, a witness says.
The drone was being operated in a restricted area in a possible attempt to take aerial photos of Frogmore House a day after Harry and Meghan moved in.
A photographer walking in Great Windsor Park took snaps of the quad-copter soaring hundreds of metres into the air as passenger jets flew just 90 metres (300ft) above on their final approach.
A witness said the drone flew south to north along the line of The Long Walk - the route Harry and Meghan took in a carriage on their wedding day last year - and hovered over Windsor Castle.
It then returned south down the The Long Walk and swerved east and headed towards Frogmore Cottage before returning south where it came from and disappearing.
The drone flight took place just after 5pm on Saturday.
The photographer, who snapped the drone on a long lens with a professional camera, estimated the height of the drone to be more than 300 metres (984ft).
The maximum height a drone can be legally flown, even in an uncontrolled airspace, is 121 metres (396ft).
The route taken by the drone was within very tightly controlled airspace near to one of the world's busiest flight paths.
It was in the London Central Zone as well as being right in the middle of the Heathrow arrivals and departures flight path with passenger jets flying through it at low altitude every two minutes.
It was also within five miles of the airport, which is a further controlled zone by law, and within close proximity of Windsor Castle, which is a banned zone for drone flights.
It is also illegal to fly zones within the confines of Windsor Great Park.
A website dedicated to tracking all flights in and out of international airports showed that at 5.03pm on Saturday - right in the middle of the drone flight - eight passenger jets were lining up to make the final approach to Heathrow flying over this exact part of Windsor.

Passenger planes flew overhead at an altitude of between 1,300ft and 1,400ft, according to flight tracking website

A witness said of the drone: "We were walking along the Long Walk towards Windsor Castle a few hundred metres from the castle.

"The passenger jet flight path switches between times of day and at this time (5pm) arrivals were coming in right over our heads.

"They are always very low.
"The noise is deafening.

"There were jumbo jets (Boeing 747) and super jumbos (Airbus A380) and others.

"They come about every two minutes and on Saturday that was their flight path all afternoon.

"Then in between the flights we heard the distinctive whirring of a drone overhead."

The witness added: "I was quite shocked. It seems like such an obviously dangerous thing to do with the planes coming so low overheard and so regularly right in this area.

"It flew over our heads at about 200 metres up towards Windsor Castle and then went up very high almost out of sight but we could see that it came back towards us then went to the east over to the area where I know Frogmore Cottage is.

"Then it returned to the Long Walk and flew back over our heads and went south out of sight.

"It was in the air above us for about five or six minutes.

"In that time, three flights must have come over in the exact same air space and also very low."
Harry, 34, and Meghan, 37, only moved in to Frogmore Cottage, their new 10-bedroom home, on Friday after a months-long renovation.

The Duchess of Sussex is due to give birth to the couple's first child soon.

It is said the renovation of the couple's Grade II-listed Frogmore Cottage cost £3million.

Harry and Meghan had been living in a cottage on the grounds of Kensington Palace in west London, but decided to move to the Queen's Windsor estate for more privacy.

Between 19 and 21 December last year, hundreds of flights were cancelled at Gatwick Airport, following reports of drone sightings close to the runway.

The reports caused major disruption, affecting approximately 140,000 passengers and 1,000 flights.

A J Posted at 4-8 01:52
I think the only real way to stop this type of fake news is for a multi billion pound organisation like DJI to protect it's customers and business interests by taking newspapers like this to court but it will be so difficult to prove either way and very costly and DJI were not mentioned.
Unfortunately, all we can do is fly legally and safely and have the common sense to judge if an article is on point or a load of bull - this is clearly the latter. People will believe what they want to believe and as long as stories like this sell (and they will especially when connected to Royalty) then the media will continue to publish this crap and taking a derogatory approach to drones is more of a cash cow then emphasising how lives are saved with them etc. Let's not forget that the British tabloid papers killed Prince Harry's mother by hounding her...

It is easier than that and it is in everyone's control.
Don't look at known junk sites like MSN. They only exist because of advertising revenue  and the advertisers know where the 'I believe everything I read' readers click.
Don't go there and they will die.

This 'article' is such a load of crock. Heathrow has drone counter measures in operation and would have picked up the drone at that altitude and range. Also that area is under a geo fenced 'red zone', so any DJI craft would not have been able to fly there at any altitude. Drone piloting is easy meat for the tabloids - and yet as AJ points out they have been the worst offenders - invading people's privacy by whatever means possible.

AlansDronePics Posted at 4-8 03:00
It is easier than that and it is in everyone's control.
Don't look at known junk sites like MSN. They only exist because of advertising revenue  and the advertisers know where the 'I believe everything I read' readers click.
Don't go there and they will die.

Exactly - don't buy the these papers or view the articles and they'll fold - just like many have lately.

AnzacJack Posted at 4-8 02:59
A drone pilot risked disaster by flying the device over Prince Harry and Meghan Markle's new country home in the middle of Heathrow's busy flight path, a witness says.
The drone was being operated in a restricted area in a possible attempt to take aerial photos of Frogmore House a day after Harry and Meghan moved in.
A photographer walking in Great Windsor Park took snaps of the quad-copter soaring hundreds of metres into the air as passenger jets flew just 90 metres (300ft) above on their final approach.

May be they are more astute with international publications lol The bottom line is that the whole article is full of many flaws. How on earth can a photographer on the ground tell the precise altitude of a drone to the foot that you and I would not even hear at that altitude to know it was there in the first place? Does he have a barometric device reader in his head? Perhaps Gatwick Airport should hire his services at seeing 750g drones 984' above the ground and can assess the precise flight path of the drones entire journey without seeing the app, flight records or even the drone... Strange how despite such detailed sightings he strangely lost the drone when it was landing... It's a complete and utter farce and quite typical of tabloids exploiting situations to drive their falling numbers.

Drones apart, who in their right mind would choose to live under the flight path of a major airport?
Its not as though they, sorry, the public, cant afford to buy them somewhere special.
One thing is for certain, he and she won't be flying a DJI drone there, because of the NFZ limits.

This is SOOOO stupid. Birds and geese cause more of an issue than any drone ever has. Stupid story just to sell prints. People need to wake up and smell the fake news.  Aside form that... 300-400--- even 800 feet is still too low to have any issues with a passenger aircraft that will be well above 1,000 feet even on approach. Stupid story.

but was it a "bad" drone ? from where they were, is that in a FRZ ? looking in the NATS app there is no grofencing hack as there is no geofence there at all.
Assuming they were not over 400ft was the flight illegal ? if not then this is a journalist reporting something as illegal when it wasn't

Don't believe for a second they heard drone overhead at altitude claimed by PhoTog.  
Perhaps it is time to investigate PhoTog's claims.  Knowing PhoTog's often get $$$ for use of their pictures.

What should be done by investigators is to recreate picture using PhoTog's camera and lens.  
See at what altitude PhoTog's claimed picture can be duplicated.

Like they could hear the drone over the aircraft that were apparently almost constantly flying overhead.. The news and drones will never mix.

J AV10 Posted at 4-8 13:44
Like they could hear the drone over the aircraft that were apparently almost constantly flying overhead.. The news and drones will never mix.

In my parts the news and media use drones themselves... so mainly penny making tabloids and democrats trying to spin their BS.

It was Harry and Megans Drone ;-) , well he is a qualified Pilot lol

Uptowndisco Posted at 4-9 07:32
It was Harry and Megans Drone ;-) , well he is a qualified Pilot lol

From supposed Royal uproar over Megan insisting on raising gender neutral baby on a vegan only diet, Harry may be longing for days of Piloting solo.