Drones at Gatwick

[Steve H]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42238115

If there is even the slightest chance of a plane being hit by a drone, they should not be used as play things by the general public.

Logic and a measured response were never your fortes, were they? I repeat: how about banning cars?

[jeremyp]

Legislation change is glacial in comparison to technological change. It's also quite difficult to think out all the implications of technology.

Except, of course, in this instance. It's already illegal to fly a drone within 1km of Gatwick airport. It's just a case of catching these people and then, as pointed out above, it's up to five years at her majesty's pleasure and I can't imagine they won't get the maximum.

An alternative might be to shut them in Gatwick South terminal along with all the people still waiting for their flights but I'm against lynching.

[Roses]

Logic and a measured response were never your fortes, were they? I repeat: how about banning cars?

It is you who isn't using logic, cars are necessary for getting from A to B, drones are toys in the hands of the general public.

[Steve H]

It is you who isn't using logic, cars are necessary for getting from A to B, drones are toys in the hands of the general public.

I manage perfectly well without a car.

[Roses]

I manage perfectly well without a car.

Fine. But a car isn't a toy, a drone is in the hands of the general public. Having said that all road users, whatever means of transport they employ, should adhere to the rules of the road. Some cyclists around here  behave like idiots, riding several abreast, not allowing traffic to pass them, often they ride on the pavements and ignore the traffic lights. It should be the law that all cyclists wear high viz clothes, and helmets, and use lights when the visibility is poor.

[jeremyp]

And in any case, how likely is it that a drone would bring down an aircraft? Bird strikes are rare, and there are a lot more birds in the air than drones.

If a large bird hits your plane, it can still be pretty serious. Also, birds are much more squishy than drones. Every drone has a heavyish lithium battery inside it that could probably do some damage if it hits a plane at a relative speed of a hundred miles per hour.

I'm not saying that the law should be changed (I think it's about right now), just that we shouldn't dismiss the danger just because birds don't often cause plane crashes.

[Steve H]

Fine. But a car isn't a toy, a drone is in the hands of the general public. Having said that all road users, whatever means of transport they employ, should adhere to the rules of the road. Some cyclists around here  behave like idiots, riding several abreast, not allowing traffic to pass them, often they ride on the pavements and ignore the traffic lights. It should be the law that all cyclists wear high viz clothes, and helmets, and use lights when the visibility is poor.

You're a roper little fascist, aren't you? You'll never get me wearing a helmet!

[Steve H]

https://uokhun.uk/2018/12/20/these-aerial-images-of-gatwick-airport-are-breathtaking/?fbclid=IwAR33e2QuSZbC--niOvV06g22iS8vhsP1E4WmhryF42TFnluxs51vsM7Ge6Y

[jeremyp]

Fine. But a car isn't a toy, a drone is in the hands of the general public. Having said that all road users, whatever means of transport they employ, should adhere to the rules of the road. Some cyclists around here  behave like idiots, riding several abreast, not allowing traffic to pass them, often they ride on the pavements and ignore the traffic lights. It should be the law that all cyclists wear high viz clothes, and helmets, and use lights when the visibility is poor.

Do you want me to give you a list of all the recreational activities that are a bit dangerous in some sense that we would have to ban if we followed your logic?

Even your car argument is faulty. What if A is my house and B is my local cinema? I'd be taking a dangerous machine out on to the road just so I could pursue a recreational activity. That should be banned right? Or just maybe we could take a measured response instead of a blanket ban.

[jeremyp]

Fine. But a car isn't a toy, a drone is in the hands of the general public. Having said that all road users, whatever means of transport they employ, should adhere to the rules of the road. Some cyclists around here  behave like idiots, riding several abreast, not allowing traffic to pass them, often they ride on the pavements and ignore the traffic lights. It should be the law that all cyclists wear high viz clothes, and helmets, and use lights when the visibility is poor.

What have badly behaved cyclists got to do with drones?

[King Oberon]

On a more serious side, perhaps there's a movie in this.... Attack of the Drones? 

[Roses]

You're a roper little fascist, aren't you? You'll never get me wearing a helmet!

IDIOT!

[jeremyp]

On a more serious side, perhaps there's a movie in this.... Attack of the Drones? 

Or a TV series: The Drone Wars.

Actually, if we have LR's ban on drones, does that mean that it will no longer be legal to possess a set of bagpipes? Every cloud has a silver lining.

[Roses]

Or a TV series: The Drone Wars.

Actually, if we have LR's ban on drones does that mean that it will no longer be legal to possess a set of bagpipes? Ever cloud has a silver lining.

Bagpipes might be a danger to the ears, but I haven't heard of them putting planes in danger.

[jeremyp]

Bagpipes might be a danger to the ears, but I haven't heard of them putting planes in danger.

If somebody started playing them on a plane, there might be serious violence. It's better to ban them outright.

[Roses]

If somebody started playing them on a plane, there might be serious violence. It's better to ban them outright.

WOW! I never thought of that, you might be right.  You and I are going to end up strapped to the Scot's execution chair any minute now.

[King Oberon]

Whatthis? Bagpipeism?

I mean I've heard, but would never believed it until i witnessed it with my own eyes!!!

I'm sending your details to Highland Airways, enjoy your next walk to Shetland Jeremy.

If i have to go hurtling to the ground in a plane I can think of no better sound to hear on my way to the pearly gates that i don't believe in!

[Aruntraveller]

WOW! I never thought of that, you might be right.  You and I are going to end up strapped to the Scot's execution chair any minute now.

I think it's a fair enough observation. There are many admirable things to have come out of Scotland.

Bagpipes are not amongst those things. 

[Owlswing]

And in any case, how likely is it that a drone would bring down an aircraft? Bird strikes are rare, and there are a lot more birds in the air than drones.

There speaks someone who does not live less than two thousand feet under the approach for Runway 28R at LHR!
 

[Steve H]

IDIOT!

Your attitude seems to be "if in doubt, ban it". That is a fascistic attitude. If your shouty response refers to my non-wearing of a helmet, I should point out that the only proper survey into cycle helmets actually in use (as opposed to laboratory tests), conducted by Mayer Hillman, concluded that they at best have no effect, and put adolescent and young adult males at greater risk of death or serious injury, due to risk homeostasis, the phenomenon whereby people who think they are protected by some specific measure go faster and take more risks. Denmark and the Netherlands have hugely greater cycle use proportional to the population than the UK, and no-one in either country wears helmets. (Well, obviously not literally no-one, but helmet use is rare.)
Try doing a bit of research before using your adolescent capitals and exclamation marks.

[Robbie]

There speaks someone who does not live less than two thousand feet under the approach for Runway 28R at LHR!
 

Have you had various bits fall on you, your house or in your garden Owl? Ooohhh...
jeremy addressed this quite fairly I think. Quote below.

If a large bird hits your plane, it can still be pretty serious. Also, birds are much more squishy than drones. Every drone has a heavyish lithium battery inside it that could probably do some damage if it hits a plane at a relative speed of a hundred miles per hour.

I'm not saying that the law should be changed (I think it's about right now), just that we shouldn't dismiss the danger just because birds don't often cause plane crashes.

Your attitude seems to be "if in doubt, ban it". That is a fascistic attitude. If your shouty response refers to my non-wearing of a helmet, I should point out that the only proper survey into cycle helmets actually in use (as opposed to laboratory tests), conducted by Mayer Hillman, concluded that they at best have no effect, and put adolescent and young adult males at greater risk of death or serious injury, due to risk homeostasis, the phenomenon whereby people who think they are protected by some specific measure go faster and take more risks. Denmark and the Netherlands have hugely greater cycle use proportional to the population than the UK, and no-one in either country wears helmets. (Well, obviously not literally no-one, but helmet use is rare.)
Try doing a bit of research before using your adolescent capitals and exclamation marks.

I didn't know that, in fact I thought it was the law for every cyclist to wear a helmet, I've not seen any without (or not noticed). Maybe it is only law for children. I never dreamed you didn't wear a helmet.

What you say is interesting and makes some sense but from what you say, applies to males. So I'm safe peddling in my helmet - I don't go far or fast and avoid traffic like the plague.

[Roses]

There speaks someone who does not live less than two thousand feet under the approach for Runway 28R at LHR!

The airport catering for the Airbus planes is not far from here. The huge Beluga flies over our home several times a day taking aircraft wings to France. If one of those planes was downed by an imbecile with a drone, the devastation to people and homes on the ground would be terrible. 

[Steve H]

Robbie - by all means wear a helmet if you want to, but don't imagine that it makes you significantly safer. As far as I am aware, helmet-wearing in the UK is optional for everyone.
Risk homeostasis is strongest in adolescent and young adult men, apparently. It's probably the testosterone, which is why they are all such idiots. (Yes, so was I when I was that age.)

[King Oberon]

Bit of a sore subject for me but I feel like sharing this might give you my changed opinion.

I'd never wore a helmet in my life (fell off bikes loads of times) I was out with my son who misheard me and went across the lights and was hit by a bus on his bike (no helmet, I know I've learned the hard way), strangely the driver hit the breaks and he was almost gently tapped by it went over and banged the back of his head, blood coming out of his ears he did some serious damage to the base of his skull.

Not only was i in shock i had to call his (my ex at the time) mother from the ambulance and tell her he didn't have a helmet on. He was in hospital for about 3 weeks, he was about 7 at the time and it was probably the worst thing that's happened to me in my life, and I've led an strange old life. Thankfully he recovered with no long term problems mainly due to the amount of people in the RSPB center next door who had medical experience, luck was with me that day.

He's 20 now and fond of skateboarding, I think we both learned a tough lesson that day, helmet for both of us!

I know its one of these things that happened to someone else, but i'm sure before it happened it would never happen to me

[King Oberon]

On a lighter note... we are no danger to your great white birds in the sky!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5156475/Fairies-them.html