BBC:
The Army has deployed "specialist equipment" to Gatwick Airport as the travel chaos caused by drone activity shows no sign of abating. Tens of thousands of passengers on several airlines have been disrupted by drones flying over the airport. In a tweet, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) said Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson had confirmed the military deployment.
He said: "The armed forces have a range of unique capabilities and this isn't something we would usually deploy but we are there to assist and do everything we can so that they are in a position to open the airport at the earliest opportunity."
Gatwick's runway has been shut since Wednesday night because devices have been repeatedly flown over the airfield.
Free insightful mods for the most creative solution.
Updates:
Shooting down a drone which has caused chaos at Gatwick Airport is a "tactical option" being considered by police. The measure had previously been ruled out by Sussex Police, which cited concerns over "stray bullets". But with the airport expected to remain closed on Friday, Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said the force would "do what we can to take that drone out of the sky".
Gatwick runway reopens after disruption
A Gatwick spokesperson said: "Gatwick's runway is currently available and a limited number of aircraft are scheduled for departure and arrival. Gatwick continues to advise passengers to check the status of their flight with their airline before travelling to the airport as departures and arrivals will be subject to delays and cancellations."
Related: 3,500 Troops on Standby to Prepare for a "No-Deal Brexit"
Related Stories
No-deal Brexit plans put 3,500 troops on standby
Emergency no-deal Brexit contingency plans must now be implemented across government, cabinet ministers have agreed, including reserving ferry space for supplies and putting 3,500 armed forces personnel on standby to deal with any disruption.
[...] Downing Street suggested preparations could include reserving space on ferries in order to ensure a supply of food and medicines. Speaking later in the Commons, the defence secretary, Gavin Williamson, said his department "will have 3,500 service personnel held at readiness, including regulars and reserves, in order to support any government department on any contingencies they may need".
Citizens will be informed how to prepare through a "range of channels" that could include TV adverts and social media. Ministers agreed to allocate money from a £2bn contingency fund to departments such as the Home Office and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. HMRC[*] will prepare a 100-page pack for all UK businesses on preparing for no-deal, and will send out about 80,000 emails to businesses.
[*] HMRC = Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs is a non-ministerial department of the UK Government ... HMRC was formed by the merger of the Inland Revenue and Her Majesty's Customs and Excise, which took effect on 18 April 2005.
The service personnel may be called upon to assist in law enforcement, so factor that in to any riot plans you may have.
See also: Now we're facing the sad reality of Brexit — troops on the streets of Britain
Two arrested after drones delay flights and force cancellations at Gatwick Airport
UK police say they have made two arrests in connection with criminal drone activity at Gatwick Airport, and urged the public and passengers around the airport to remain vigilant. Britain's second-largest airport reopened on Friday after a mystery saboteur wrought 36 hours of travel chaos for more than 100,000 Christmas travellers by using drones to play cat-and-mouse with police snipers and the army. [...] The defence ministry refused to comment on what technology was deployed, but drone experts said airports needed to deploy specialist radar reinforced by thermal imaging technology to detect such unmanned flying vehicles.
See also: Gatwick drones: Two arrested over flight disruption
A 47-year-old man and a 54-year-old woman, from Crawley, were arrested in the town at about 22:00 GMT on Friday.
Previously: Army Called in Amid UK Drone Chaos (Updated)
Gatwick drones pair 'no longer suspects'
A man and woman arrested in connection with drone sightings that grounded flights at Gatwick Airport have been released without charge. The 47-year-old man and 54-year-old woman, from Crawley, West Sussex, had been arrested on Friday night.
Sussex Police said there had been 67 reports of drone sightings - having earlier cast doubt on "genuine drove activity". Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said no footage of a drone had been obtained. And he said there was "always a possibility" the reported sightings of drones were mistaken. However, he later confirmed the reported sightings made by the public, police and airport staff from December 19 to 21 were being "actively investigated".
"We are interviewing those who have reported these sightings, are carrying out extensive house-to-house inquiries, and carrying out a forensic examination of a damaged drone found near the perimeter of the airport." Det Ch Supt Tingley said it was "a working assumption" the device could be connected to their investigation, but officers were keeping "an open mind".
Sounds like they're about ready to blame aliens, the original drone champions.
Previously: Army Called in Amid UK Drone Chaos (Updated)
Two People Arrested for Gatwick Airport Drone Incident
(Score: -1, Troll) by Ethanol-fueled on Friday December 21 2018, @06:41AM
Hear this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kB9hjYLkTMg [youtube.com]
(Score: 5, Funny) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @06:57AM (13 children)
Solution to what exactly? To eliminate the drones or to deploy drones undetected?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by zocalo on Friday December 21 2018, @07:22AM (5 children)
As for eliminating the drones. Well, there are a lot of companies peddling technologies that claim to do that. I say get them all to Gatwick with their gear and have a competetive tender in a very literal sense; the first company to successfully and safely down one of the drones wins the contract to equip the UK's airports with anti-drone tech.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @07:48AM (4 children)
Does using nukes count as a solution?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by MostCynical on Friday December 21 2018, @07:58AM (2 children)
I suspect the only "company" with access to nukes is the CIA..
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @08:26AM
I suspect the Russian Mafia could manage to get some too.
Tactical charges [wikipedia.org] mainly
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Friday December 21 2018, @08:26AM
I wouldn't be so sure, capitalism has made inroads into Russia for quite some time...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @09:15AM
Close air support and friendly fire should be easier to tell apart.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @08:39AM (4 children)
Wasn't there some BS about DJI updating their airport no-fly fencing software in recent months? A water cannon or net cannon should easily take down the drone. Then we trace the serial number (if it hasn't been filed off). The _manufacturer_ is then permanently banned worldwide from _any_ further sales. As for the idiots behind this - strip all their family assets to distribute as compensation to all affected (not lawyers, airport, govt, but the affected passengers).
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @11:36AM (1 child)
And you reckon drone is so hard to build DIY from parts? Even a bicopter (which is inherently quite unstable and hard to manoeuvre) is doable [youtube.com]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Friday December 21 2018, @03:04PM
> And you reckon drone is so hard to build DIY from parts? Even a bicopter (which is inherently quite unstable and hard to manoeuvre) is doable [youtube.com]
Or just modify a standard issue one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @12:43PM
Yeah, bans, they work so good.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday December 21 2018, @01:44PM
As long as we get to ban the government that passes such regulation from operating in the Milky Way, I'm on board with it.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Friday December 21 2018, @10:29PM (1 child)
Yes.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @10:51PM
Cool. Then, we'll do that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @07:23AM (10 children)
Run it down with a helicopter.
Ram it with another drone.
Attack it with a trained hawk.
Shotgun.
Net gun.
Tshirt Cannon.
High pressure water cannon.
High speed fly by ala F11.
Put up a public reward for $1000 to any member of the public who takes it down or captures it.
EMP? Is nuking the airport worth it though.
Throw things at it. The army has people just for this.
Scramble the control system signal?
Hack it to take control?
Find the operator and take them out?
Offer a reward to find the operator. No taxes for one year.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @07:36AM (2 children)
Call Wonder woman.
Summon Spiderman.
Bat signal.
Broadcast that it is preventing Louise Lane from getting home for the holidays.
(Score: 2) by rts008 on Friday December 21 2018, @02:08PM (1 child)
Jeez, Louise. I think you mean Lois Lane.
Or Superman doing the nasty with Lois' sister/mom?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @03:02PM
Shhhhh we don't know who they are in civilian garb
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @08:10AM (5 children)
Explosively pumped flux compression [wikipedia.org] works fine with conventional explosives.
Even an explosive-driven ferromagnetic generator [wikipedia.org] may be enough.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @08:38AM (2 children)
Explode ordinance close enough to disable the drone without harming anything else?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @11:02AM (1 child)
May be hard to get close enough to the moving object with a small amount of explosive.
Which explosive can still be sufficient to form an EMP cone large enough to catch the drone from 100m and still small enough to deliver enough kick to fry the drone's electronics.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by RS3 on Friday December 21 2018, @01:57PM
How about a nice high-energy EM pulse through a parabolic or phased-array antenna?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @09:09AM (1 child)
"Mad Science" means never stopping to ask "what's the worst thing that could happen?"
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @11:38AM
And what's wrong of that [sciencemadness.org]?
(grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by deadstick on Friday December 21 2018, @02:16PM
Maser, maybe? Should be able to fry the electronics.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @07:28AM (6 children)
You want the drones gone? I humbly suggest to detonate a strategic nuclear weapon at the airport.
Pros:
- current drones (and pilots) are definitely gone
- no more drones guaranteed for ca. 1-2 years, unlikely for 50 more years
- fallout may be dumped over Europe instead of Wales and West England, just wait for good winds
- Trump applauds decisive "Britain First!" (in so many ways ...) strategy
Cons:
- almost all current non-dronepilots in a 50km radius are also done for
- rad-hardened rebuild of Gatwick (and surrounding shires) needed, too late for this holiday season
- political fallout may return from France, Britain might even be forced to leave EU
- environmentalist whining likely (except in Gatwick)
Admittedly, this solution is not the most *creative* one. This is unsurprising, as I am simply reiterating it from plans in the Russian, Chinese and North Korean High Commands. But it is very likely the most *effective* solution to the immediate problem of drones flying over Gatwick Airport!
(for the TLAs: the above is an example of sarcasm. For better understanding, look it up in Wikipedia. TLDR: I don't really mean it as written)
(Score: 4, Funny) by MostCynical on Friday December 21 2018, @08:00AM (2 children)
Additional pro:
No more Gatwick.
"I guess once you start doubting, there's no end to it." -Batou, Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @09:12AM (1 child)
If you're not willing to shell your own position, you're not willing to win.
-
http://schlockmercenary.wikia.com/wiki/The_Seventy_Maxims_of_Maximally_Effective_Mercenaries [wikia.com]
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Friday December 21 2018, @03:47PM
From Braveheart:
Longshanks:
English General:
Longshanks:
--
Jst Sy N to Lssy Cmprssn.
(Score: 3, Funny) by bzipitidoo on Friday December 21 2018, @03:36PM (2 children)
So this is how the War on Christmas starts! Drone rage, and catharsis achieved with nukes!
Hey God, it's us. Can we haz new planet for Christmas? Please? Don't think Santa can handle this request, so we're asking You. And, uh, if You could let us in on what happened to that whole Peace On Earth thing?
(Score: 3, Funny) by Freeman on Friday December 21 2018, @04:47PM (1 child)
The peace on earth thing is the ideal that is hoped for and will be achieved. In the meantime, however, things will be getting much rougher, before they get any better.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday December 21 2018, @09:34PM
If your autofellating narcissist of a God-figure had done it right in the first place, we wouldn't be having this discussion :) Daily reminder that Yahweh does not possess the great-making qualities to the maximal extent and therefore is not actually God, which means he's a blasphemous demon *pretending* to be God.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @07:31AM (2 children)
Regulation, no fly zones, serious signage, and serious penalties for flying in the airport's airspace.
Most physical solutions have a wide range of possible negative effects, the first of which is where does the drone land if it gets shot down?
The only physical solution I can imagine is other drones, but that has its own possible issues with collision and such. If the biggest issue is people who just fly the drone somewhat nearby but too far to see no-fly signs, then maybe some drones with loudspeakers that can fly out to any remote transmitters and announce the flight ban and record the situation.
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday December 21 2018, @10:23AM
Regulation, no fly zones, serious signage, and serious penalties for flying in the airport's airspace.
Got that. May help stop the average joe playing with his new toy, but not a concerted effort from a well funded group with heavy duty drones who want to disrupt an airport for some reason (which is what was going on here)
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Friday December 21 2018, @11:19AM
That's four options, and they are already in place, and don't work.
As for where the drone falls down, the point is that it is over an airfield which is a fairly empty area, especially with no planes flying. A bigger problem is where the bullets land if you shoot it down with eg a Gatling gun (which would be quite easy). Shotgun pellets are fairly harmless though by the time they land at terminal velocity from being shot high. Probably need a super-charged shotgun though to reach height, so perhaps best deployed by a "fighter" drone.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Friday December 21 2018, @07:38AM (3 children)
There's riot gear that shoots out man sized butterfly nets so you could equip a few drones with those and keep them around the airport. You don't even have to hire drone operators for the job with all those grounded pilots waiting for the drone to be taken down...
p.e. Why can't I stop thinking about cat stuck on trees...
compiling...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @08:14AM (1 child)
Lure them in the same area, drop to he ground and watch them "netting" each other.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Friday December 21 2018, @08:18AM
Are we talking about drones or pilots?
compiling...
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @08:40AM
Automate the net slinging drones to hunt the invasive drones?
Unidentified flying intruder! Net it!
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Friday December 21 2018, @08:34AM (7 children)
1. Hire one or more competitive drone flyers, they're good at chasing other drones.
2. Follow drone back to operator (or landing area, then surveil).
3. Put the message through to the reaper drone pilot with authorisation.
4. Enjoy fireworks and explosively set precedent.
Of course, steps 3 and 4 could be toned down, but the effectiveness of the operation would be reduced...
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @09:02AM (1 child)
Like pest control, for drones?
Good idea.
Design new drones with capabilites to hunt down and knock drones out of the sky!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday December 21 2018, @10:49PM
Cost asymmetry may favour the low tech solution.
E.g. assuming your reaper is a Reaper, for the price you pay for a it ($14M) I can build some ~100K drones dumb enough to just follow a circuit over the designated area (raspi, accelerometer, gps, battery, motors, etc).
Since software is cheap to distribute, I might get ideas about a minimalistic shape recognition software for my drones and make the cheap drones swarm anything that resembles a Reaper when it enters the perimeter.
(see drone rush tactics in Starcraft)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Friday December 21 2018, @11:49AM (4 children)
Alternatively:
a) Employ a few clay pigeon shooting champions. (Stray buckshot is not very deadly, and does not travel far on the scale of an airport).
b) use the high power laser weapons we keep hearing about (could be laser guided for a Brucey bonus).
Just about anything will bing down a drone - maybe excluding wishful thinking.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 2) by coolgopher on Friday December 21 2018, @01:26PM
Oooh, ooh, I know! Put pictures of boobs on the runway! That'll attract the drones to a well-known, predefined spot for easy disposal!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @02:53PM (1 child)
Buckshot sounds nice, but then you have the problem of little drone pieces scattered all over - just waiting to get sucked into an engine or blow out a tyre.
(Score: 2) by Nuke on Friday December 21 2018, @05:16PM
But aircraft aren't flying while the drones are around, thats the point. The drone pieces can be picked up after they are shot down, at least any pieces big enough to cause the damage you are worried about.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday December 21 2018, @05:09PM
I was thinking of hiring the local archery club to practice with streamers attached to the arrows. The streamers would need to be very light-weight, probably essentially threads, but the arrows themselves might get hit by the props. They could use padded arrow heads to avoid injuring anyone they hit.
The problem is how to you get them out shooting at the moment a wandering drone appears. So maybe an automated bolo launcher is a better idea. (AKA chain-shot, but I'm thinking of something lighter weight.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by EventH0rizon on Friday December 21 2018, @08:41AM (2 children)
The solution? Money, lots of it; offered with no strings attached.
Something like:
* Give us the details of one of the perpetrators who flew a drone over the airport before today and we'll give you 100,000 pounds
* Give us the details of *two* such teams or individuals who flew separate drones, and we'll give you 500,00 pounds
etc
The total cost of such a scheme is likely less than the total cost of the mobilization of troops etc already underway.
(Score: 2) by Hyper on Friday December 21 2018, @09:04AM
Good plan. How much have they spent already trying to fix this?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fyngyrz on Friday December 21 2018, @03:53PM
Seems to me a give-the-informant-money solution could result in people with drones being turned in who had nothing to do with the event, other than being potential sources of money for the person doing the informing.
Best solutions thus far are upwards aimed laser weaponry. Longish range, no need to lead the target, drone falls mostly intact.
--
The only narcissists I have room in my life for are my cats.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @09:30AM (8 children)
I'm glad people have found an effective way to fuck with an airport. After all, airports regularly fuck people who travel and people who live next door.
Kudos to the drone flyers. We don't need to fly. Flying kills the planet.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @09:39AM
And yet there you are, advocating the flying of drones ...
(Score: 2) by isostatic on Friday December 21 2018, @10:20AM (6 children)
After all, airports regularly fuck people who travel and people who live next door.
Very few "people who live next door", lived there before the airport. The worst type of NIMBY is the one who buys a discounted house because of the airport/powerplant/highway next door, then complains about said airport/powerplant/highway
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday December 21 2018, @11:18AM (2 children)
I can top that:
People (surprise, surprise) find the noise annoying. Complain to town that something has to be done about it.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @06:50PM
Spineless courts.
#6 should have been a rebuke from the Judge:
You folks sued to build houses in an area where the town said the noise was such that you should not be allowed to build. You therefore knew full well what you were getting into. Therefore, no, you get to pay for noise suppression yourself.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday December 22 2018, @11:50AM
The problem with numbers two and three is that it is usually just one scummy real estate developer who does the suing and building. He's made his bucks and vanished by the time the noise complaints start. What they need to do for any building that does get forced unto free space or buffer zones is require that the developer is financially liable for any future issues that arise from building in these zones. Of course, they would likely have to rewrite corporate laws first...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @01:17PM (2 children)
[citation needed] – extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday December 21 2018, @05:11PM
Well, the times I've lived near an airport the airport was there first. Granted my father was in the military.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @06:59PM
No citation needed.
Very few airports are new construction in 2018 (most were built circa 1950-1970 or so).
2018-1950 = 68 years
2018-1970 = 48 years
The far extreme (1950) is beginning to get close to the average human lifespan, therefore some larger percentage of folks who have lived in the same house, next to the airport, for 68 years have now passed away.
The near extreme (1970) is at a point that many of those folks will still be alive in 2018. But, they would also have had to remain in the same house for 48 years straight now (which will remove from consideration some folks, as they will have moved in the intervening 48 years).
So, therefore, some number of residents near airports have moved in after the airport was operational. Exactly what that percentage is we can't estimate just from the dates (but for a specific area, locality real-estate sales records would indicate who was a resident pre-airport vs. who bought a property after the airport was operational.
For those residents that bought a property after the airport was operational, their complaints should simply be met with: "you knew it was there when you bought, if you don't like it, then move elsewhere".
The only residents for which a complaint should be listened to are those who bought property before the airport was operational, and remain in that property (which as shown above, will be something less than 100% but likely more than 0%).
Now, for areas that have had new flight paths added, which previously did not have flight paths overhead, the same rules should still apply. If you have owned the property since before the flight path change, then you get to complain. If you bought after the flight path change, well, tough luck to you, you should have thought about this before buying.
(Score: 3, Funny) by shortscreen on Friday December 21 2018, @10:47AM
Need some drone bait.
Let it be known that Page 3 models will be present on the airport grounds. When all the flying eyeballs converge at the spot to investigate, a trap could be deployed. Maybe a clay bazooka or some big glass walls like the ones at Apple HQ that people kept walking into. Or maybe the drones would just fall to the ground when their batteries ran out.
(Score: 2) by drussell on Friday December 21 2018, @01:15PM
Send Billy after it...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8gNTWjyIT0 [youtube.com]
(Score: -1, Troll) by realDonaldTrump on Friday December 21 2018, @01:58PM (1 child)
Then I would thank the Secretary of Defense for his service. Tell him he's fired -- immediately. And put in a MUCH BETTER guy for the job. Or possibly a woman -- one with a terrific figure!!!
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday December 22 2018, @02:58AM
(cont) I'd also do the Travel Ban -- and hopefully it wouldn't go to the Court of some HORRIBLE Muslim Judge!!!!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Friday December 21 2018, @02:06PM
Whoever is flying all these drones are doing it at the wrong airport. Do it at the private landing strips used by the rich and important. The rest of us will applaud them and the cops will look the other way, "Sorry, Minister, we weren't able to locate the perps."
Put the hurt on the people who put the hurt on us.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @02:48PM
So who could be behind this? Terrorists? Kids? Or maybe those guys who sell anti-drone equipment who have been brushed off by all prospective customers because didn't really have a problem with stray drones. Now they do.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Friday December 21 2018, @04:01PM (2 children)
--
I hate being bipolar... it's awesome!
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 21 2018, @05:20PM (1 child)
That works if the pilot is actually flying the drone. Many drones (especially the kind you can build yourself) can be set to fly pre-programmed flight paths and may only need a single single radio blip to send further instructions. If the pilot is smart he wont blip from the same location and wont do it often at all. The way I see it the only way to effectively remove a drone that is autonomous is to physically disrupt its flight.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Friday December 21 2018, @05:24PM
Yep, if that's what is going on, then the answer is a high power laser. 😊
--
On censorship and repression:
Sweeping the trash under the bed just means
you don't know what's festering under there.
(Score: 2) by captain normal on Friday December 21 2018, @07:03PM
Seems like it should be fairly simple to monitor the control frequencies for drones as they are probably using off the shelf RF controls. If they are not up long enough to track the source, then just jam the frequency around the airport.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 22 2018, @03:43AM
Lased microwaves. Pew pew. Bzzrt bzzrt.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 22 2018, @01:42PM
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-12-22/two-arrested-over-gatwick-illegal-drone-activity/10663776 [abc.net.au]