Drones at Gatwick
Comments
-
Surely they were wasting electricity though?Stu_of_Kunming said:
I'd wager it was a pair of ecojerks trying to 'save the planet'Baldybonce said:I don't get what sort of fucking half wit could derive pleasure out of doing this sort of thing. It will be interesting to see if there is more to this than two drone geeks.
0 -
Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know the maximum sentence that could be dished out for this offence?0
-
Thanks guys.0
-
I'd then make them pay ALL the people that have been affected by if all. Will run into hundreds of thousands & bankrupt them. Good.MrLargo said:
5 years is the maximum for drone-related offences. You can get life for "endangering an airport".SoundAsa£ said:Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know the maximum sentence that could be dished out for this offence?
They won't thought. Judge will give them 18 months suspended sentence & tell them not to be silly again.1 -
Fancy a bet for Demelza they get time, assuming they're convicted?golfaddick said:
I'd then make them pay ALL the people that have been affected by if all. Will run into hundreds of thousands & bankrupt them. Good.MrLargo said:
5 years is the maximum for drone-related offences. You can get life for "endangering an airport".SoundAsa£ said:Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know the maximum sentence that could be dished out for this offence?
They won't thought. Judge will give them 18 months suspended sentence & tell them not to be silly again.
No way will anyone found guilty of this not do time.6 -
-
hope the courts clobber them. If its Teens then the parents will say they have Attention Deficency or they are Autistic. If they are adults then they will be fined 2000 quid and be handed a suspended sentence. These people and the idiots that shine lasers at plane cockpits are a menace and the sentence should be reasonably severe.0
- Sponsored links:
-
Attempted Murder, 120,000 times, to be served concurrently, they’ll be out in 18-months once good behaviour is taken into account0
-
less operational costs, aircraft in the wrong place that will eventually need to fly empty to reposition (zero revenue) , the need to accommodate and feed all passengers. This will be costing airlines a small fortune, which they wont recoup.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Airlines are also raking it in today, surely.ShootersHillGuru said:
I feel confident in saying that the British Army, Navy, Air Force and Special Services can muster more than one marksman in order to dot them around the Gatwick site.Chizz said:
It's quite difficult if you can't see it. I imagine it's difficult to keep track of a drone within a 674 hectare area of land. And, once it's spotted, you'd have to hope it didn't move by the time a police marksman arrived. I don't know much about drones, but one thing I do know is that they're very mobile.johnnybev1987 said:
Or just make sure people are inside and no aeroplanes airbourne and just shoot it down, doesn't seem very difficult. But admittedly i dont even understand why it has caused this much drama other than being a potential threatShootersHillGuru said:Police saying that shooting it down would just be too dangerous. I’m no expert and have to accept that explanation but it seems odd to me that a special or even not so special marksman with a suitable weapon ought to be able to shoot down a drone.
I’m sure someone with greater knowledge will be able to tell me I’m wrong.
There may be more than one. And if one is spotted and lost sight of, it's probably best to assume that it's still in the air somewhere. (Would you want to be the copper who tells air traffic control "we have lost sight of it, so you're probably ok to carry on flying. Hopefully it's not still up there and hopefully it won't bring down any planes"?)
Having given it thought I suspect that there is more to this delay in ridding the area of the drones.
My guess is that shooting them down would only rid this particular threat. By keeping them up in the air and trying to capture the perpetrators you reduce the risk of the terrorists just pitching up with new drones in a month or so.
No need to issue refunds and saving a fortune on fuel.1 -
On the plus side for them - they should easily be able to arrange spice deliveries into the nick.MrLargo said:
5 years is the maximum for drone-related offences. You can get life for "endangering an airport".SoundAsa£ said:Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know the maximum sentence that could be dished out for this offence?
5 -
Once the dust has settled from this I think there are real positives that can be taken. This disruption has it would appear to have been caused by some eco warriors. Certainly criminal and intent on causing as much disruption as possible but not with intent to kill.
Gatwick and probably most airports were unprepared in terms of planning and counter measures. This recent issue will see that addressed pdq. Perhaps it might just shut the door to other terrorist groups who would have had far greater intent than grounding the planes. No pun but we might have dodged a bullit and closed another terror threat.6 -
If environmental protesters are terrorists now (not that I condone this protest), we're in for a lot of terrorism over the next century, and a lot of us will be proud terrorists0
-
An example will be set......should think they’ll get the max.Stu_of_Kunming said:
Fancy a bet for Demelza they get time, assuming they're convicted?golfaddick said:
I'd then make them pay ALL the people that have been affected by if all. Will run into hundreds of thousands & bankrupt them. Good.MrLargo said:
5 years is the maximum for drone-related offences. You can get life for "endangering an airport".SoundAsa£ said:Just as a matter of interest, does anyone know the maximum sentence that could be dished out for this offence?
They won't thought. Judge will give them 18 months suspended sentence & tell them not to be silly again.
No way will anyone found guilty of this not do time.
0 -
ShootersHillGuru said:
Once the dust has settled from this I think there are real positives that can be taken. This disruption has it would appear to have been caused by some eco warriors. Certainly criminal and intent on causing as much disruption as possible but not with intent to kill.
Gatwick and probably most airports were unprepared in terms of planning and counter measures. This recent issue will see that addressed pdq. Perhaps it might just shut the door to other terrorist groups who would have had far greater intent than grounding the planes. No pun but we might have dodged a bullit and closed another terror threat.
One would like to think so SHG.0 -
I would imagine most terrorists are proud, but hey, if ruining other people's lives is the way you wanna go, that says a lot about you.Leuth said:If environmental protesters are terrorists now (not that I condone this protest), we're in for a lot of terrorism over the next century, and a lot of us will be proud terrorists
10 -
I think there may be a need to ruin a few lives (not, I stress, the lives of ordinary holidaymakers) in order that life on earth can be recognisably continued. Watch this space!Stu_of_Kunming said:
I would imagine most terrorists are proud, but hey, if ruining other people's lives is the way you wanna go, that says a lot about you.Leuth said:If environmental protesters are terrorists now (not that I condone this protest), we're in for a lot of terrorism over the next century, and a lot of us will be proud terrorists
0 -
Just drop them off in the departure lounge and announce it over the tannoy.
3 - Sponsored links:
-
-
Watch this space?Leuth said:
I think there may be a need to ruin a few lives (not, I stress, the lives of ordinary holidaymakers) in order that life on earth can be recognisably continued. Watch this space!Stu_of_Kunming said:
I would imagine most terrorists are proud, but hey, if ruining other people's lives is the way you wanna go, that says a lot about you.Leuth said:If environmental protesters are terrorists now (not that I condone this protest), we're in for a lot of terrorism over the next century, and a lot of us will be proud terrorists
Why would anyone look forward to the moment when other peoples lives are ruined?
3 -
Weird.Leuth said:
I think there may be a need to ruin a few lives (not, I stress, the lives of ordinary holidaymakers) in order that life on earth can be recognisably continued. Watch this space!Stu_of_Kunming said:
I would imagine most terrorists are proud, but hey, if ruining other people's lives is the way you wanna go, that says a lot about you.Leuth said:If environmental protesters are terrorists now (not that I condone this protest), we're in for a lot of terrorism over the next century, and a lot of us will be proud terrorists
4 -
The couple charged are from Crawley. I'll guess that they are not so much eco-warriors as people who just don't like the aircraft noise. Which of course is not to condone them for one moment. Exemplary prison terms needed.3
-
I bet the legal system does their usual, boring thing of waiting until they're charged, tried, given an opportunity to defend themselves and then convicted before setting a sentence. Typical!8
-
I hope all of those involved in having their holidays messed up and the airport and airlines are able to sue the droners in a civil court for losses, this may make any others who thought of doing the same, to think again1
-
It's a shame the military didn't take out the drone and the twats flying them, for sure the capability is there, just imagine the legal parasites clamouring for compensation after those 2 decisive strikes.0
-
I understand the maximum is 5 years - let's hope it's implemented.PragueAddick said:The couple charged are from Crawley. I'll guess that they are not so much eco-warriors as people who just don't like the aircraft noise. Which of course is not to condone them for one moment. Exemplary prison terms needed.
Your comment reminds me of the oft quoted incidents of American tourists asking why they built Windsor Castle so close to the airport.2 -
I consider myself reprimanded! :-)Chizz said:I bet the legal system does their usual, boring thing of waiting until they're charged, tried, given an opportunity to defend themselves and then convicted before setting a sentence. Typical!
For now..:-)
2 -
The maximum is not 5 years. They're likely to be charged with offences way more serious than misuse of a drone.SporadicAddick said:
I understand the maximum is 5 years - let's hope it's implemented.PragueAddick said:The couple charged are from Crawley. I'll guess that they are not so much eco-warriors as people who just don't like the aircraft noise. Which of course is not to condone them for one moment. Exemplary prison terms needed.
Your comment reminds me of the oft quoted incidents of American tourists asking why they built Windsor Castle so close to the airport.
The end deportation 15 were charged with anti terrorism offences for blocking one flight (wrongly imho). This seems to be substantially more obstructive.1
