Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
100k passengers could cover a large area in a search.... Free flight to anyone bringing a drone pilot to the single police officer ambling about, trying to look busy or interested.
Seriously though, the airport is closed, all flights diverted, when the drone is up, give it a large band blocking signal, bring it down. When the next one goes up, plot where it came from, then block the signal again. If it knocks everyone local's tv, radio and wifi out for a few minutes, tough, tell them it will stop happening when the people responcible are caught.
Dr Coconut wrote: 100k passengers could cover a large area in a search.... Free flight to anyone bringing a drone pilot to the single police officer ambling about, trying to look busy or interested.
Seriously though, the airport is closed, all flights diverted, when the drone is up, give it a large band blocking signal, bring it down. When the next one goes up, plot where it came from, then block the signal again. If it knocks everyone local's tv, radio and wifi out for a few minutes, tough, tell them it will stop happening when the people responsible are caught.
Have you been watching 'The Empire Strikes Back' again...? A couple of bursts from an ion cannon, and "the first transport is away".
But, if the drone is using known frequencies, narrow-band jamming should be used ASAP.
If that fails, widen the bands until it works.
A drone with no pilot should behave in certain ways. Don't they usually hover to the ground, or return to base? If they've been programmed to do something else, at least we'll find out more about the motives of this. If it is programmed to crash into something, whether a building or infrastructure, the authorities get to pull out the big guns.
Yeah. Using their software also requires you to sign up to terms and conditions that give the Chinese government access to all your data so I'd be reticent to suggest that it be used widely.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/21 10:33:55
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I agree with the above posters that it sounds like somebody is staying mobile, using a van or something to do this, but I've also read they could be sitting in France or up the Himalayas or something, and controlling the drones from there via the internet.
The drone would still need to be landing somewhere to recharge.
I understand that there's a lot of roadways and parking around the airport, but if there's a transit van acting as a mobile base, you'd have hoped someone would have spotted it by now. That said, there are probably hundreds of valid reasons for a van to be moving around the airport area all day.
Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote: I agree with the above posters that it sounds like somebody is staying mobile, using a van or something to do this, but I've also read they could be sitting in France or up the Himalayas or something, and controlling the drones from there via the internet.
The drone would still need to be landing somewhere to recharge.
I understand that there's a lot of roadways and parking around the airport, but if there's a transit van acting as a mobile base, you'd have hoped someone would have spotted it by now. That said, there are probably hundreds of valid reasons for a van to be moving around the airport area all day.
And if they've got a drone that can fly several kilometres the van/car could be well outside of the airport grounds. If they've got a driver they could even be flying whilst moving which would likely make triangulation of the signal harder to lock down (one would assume).
I wonder if putting a police helicopter high up in the air and then visually tracking the drone would work; although that might have been complicated by airspace restrictions over the airport initially and it might even be that the drones are small enough (coupled to lighting and weather) that they are very hard to spot. Plus could be they've tried it and each time they put their helicopter up the drones go to ground; operators waiting for the helicopter to go away before resuming their disruption. .
The drone could be set to land at a specific location where someoenwaited with afresh battery, chat be the battery innundr a minute and the droncs away again. The battery changer could escape quickly.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Techpriestsupport wrote: The drone could be set to land at a specific location where someoenwaited with afresh battery, chat be the battery innundr a minute and the droncs away again. The battery changer could escape quickly.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/21 12:18:26
"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura.
I've known a lot of people over the years who were engineering and electronic geniuses, and for all the talk of putting serial numbers on drone or granting a licence, these kind of people could easily build something like this from scratch.
Well yeah, but then you're getting into the arguments of why even have laws when people are going to break them?
If you're caught operating a drone without the correct licence or ID broadcast or whatever results from this, then you suffer whatever penalty is prescribed by the law.
Crispy78 wrote: If you're caught operating a drone without the correct licence or ID broadcast or whatever results from this, then you suffer whatever penalty is prescribed by the law.
But shutting down an airport (or worse) is already going to be a crime, if someone is willing to do this kind of thing then adding on a charge of unauthorized drone operation isn't going to make much of a difference. All you're doing is adding a ton of bureaucracy to deal with these licenses, and the only real benefit is going to be stopping the careless idiots that are already stopped by geofencing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Overread wrote: I wonder if putting a police helicopter high up in the air and then visually tracking the drone would work; although that might have been complicated by airspace restrictions over the airport initially and it might even be that the drones are small enough (coupled to lighting and weather) that they are very hard to spot. Plus could be they've tried it and each time they put their helicopter up the drones go to ground; operators waiting for the helicopter to go away before resuming their disruption.
Airspace is no big deal, the controllers regularly deal with much more complicated traffic separation than having a helicopter sitting around watching for drones. The real issue is that it's hard to spot things from the air even at 500-1000' when you're right on top of it. Having played the game of "this house, no, wait, you mean the one next to that one?" while trying to show people stuff from the air the idea of trying to spot a relatively small drone quickly after launch sounds like a nightmare.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/21 12:41:22
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
Techpriestsupport wrote: The drone could be set to land at a specific location where someoenwaited with afresh battery, chat be the battery innundr a minute and the droncs away again. The battery changer could escape quickly.
Or just have a second drone ready to go while the first is recharged.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
I think there's definitely more than one drone involved here. To operate the way they have for over 24 hours suggests there has to be. Probably more than one operator too, and possibly auxiliary team members on the perimeter and in the airport itself relaying info.
With stuff like raspberry pi and other hardware people could make their own drone computer systems and make hem pretty unhackable.
As to jamming, if someone added laser receptors to a drone exterior they could control it by laser remote.
Not to tie this to 40k here but I could see the day when more and ire restrictions on available tech are imported on people by the system to prevent them form having any sort of tech edge over the system.
"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura.
And yet at the same time you can freely buy chainsaws, cars, petrol, weed killer and a host of other items that are super dangerous if used in a certain way.
Thing is one must realise that the overwhelming majority of people don't want to do terrorist acts. We've had drones for years and this is the first major incident with them that's had far reaching impact on people. We have millions of cars on the road and lorries and dustcarts and other vehicles and no one regularly goes charging through pedestrians or building bombs out of weedkiller and petrol and the like.
Sometimes if you over-react you actually create more of a problem than if you regulate and realise that the majority don't want to do these things.
TV and the way it heavily focuses on the negative can often give an impression that things are worse than they are; plus news stations buy the same stories from the same reporters and often focus on the same stories anyway. So you get a group effect. Honestly its quite rare that major news channels cover totally different major news events; they imght show different angles and interpretations, but by and large they stick to the same big stories. It's only smaller infill that tend to vary.
A simple regulation like a licence and authorized fly zones would be paperwork, but wouldn't restrict heavily. Plus as drones get bigger and more complex basic training would help avoid many accidents.
And yet you can still buy chainsaws without a licence and they are horrifically deadly to the operator and those around them if used improperly (and 5 mins on youtube can show LOADS of examples of people doing stuff that they'd never do if they had a few days of proeper training). As annoying as drones are I'd far rather welcome a licence system on chainsaws!
What about a fire company with a water cannon? That will be more than enough to down the drone, not hurt anyone, and its not like you guys lack for water.
feeder wrote: Frazz's mind is like a wiener dog in a rabbit warren. Dark, twisting tunnels, and full of the certainty that just around the next bend will be the quarry he seeks.
I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/21 14:29:08
"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura.
I agree that hunting down the person responsible is the only real "fix".
It really boils down to how the drone will send/receive the signals for control.
Straight-up radio if you can isolate it can be triangulated.
If it ties into a wireless network in the area, that gets a little harder since it may be indistinguishable from any other hand-held device signal.
You may have to use a packet sniffer and hope you can see anything looking like telemetry data (if it is not encrypted too strongly).
Some drones you can program in waypoints so it could operate autonomously, I am not sure how far consumer drones can go without it's controller periodically communicating back to it.
Backup plan is to get fed up with this mess and shoot them out of the sky with shotgun based weaponry.
Means of firing a net would need some element of surprise since the range would be rather problematic.
Signal jamming at an airport I think could not be safely done.
There are some light grade "weaponized" lasers that could melt through the fairly weak materials of drones and is "fast" enough to take them down but that would require involving some group with deep pockets.
Sorry, I am having visions of "Drone Busters!" driving around in a hearse with a laser cannon on the roof (don't cross the beams!).
Could be a good service premise.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte
I think these drones definitely are professional sabotage. I can't imagine a couple of stupid teenagers putting so much effort into what basically would be a silly prank.
I think the opposite, suddenly one day some idiot decided to do this. Tomorrow another idiot will have the same idea.
Actual saboteurs might have thought of this sooner but that itself is not always the case. I remember a journey into London and passing litter bins in the middle of the crowded concourse of Euston station. My thoughts on seeing that was 'if I were an IRA terrorist that is where I would place a bomb'. This was some years before all litter bins were removed from such places because the IRA started to do exactly that.. Gatwick has had sabotage in the past. Black Lives Matter blocked the access ramps before with a protest causing a large number of people to miss their flights.
However if saboteurs thought of drones first they would hit several airports at once, really feth things up for people. as it so happens its pranksters or kids in my opinion who are most likely responsible. Just was well,the disruption will continue for the short term but not last long. MI5 are not sleepy amateurs.
Whoever flew the drones yesterday, you* have had your lulz, do yourself a favour and stop. You might not care about anyone else, but you likely care about yourself. The system was not ready for you so if you ghost away you wont get caught. If you brag about it, or continue, you will do prison time and likely you will be forcably evicted directly or indirectly if you live in the vicinity. It sucks to have a court order preventing you from being within 10 miles of an airport, when you had accommodation near there. Yes, that does also mean being listed as intentionally homeless, so you will get no state support.
* No, I am not assuming they are on Dakka.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/12/21 14:48:05
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
A lot of the stuff that might be able to take out a drone (shotguns, nets, watercannon) are unlikely to be able to help much here as since this is apparently a large commercial drone it is flying too high
and while targeting it from another drone or helicopter might be possible they've yet to get close enough
as otherwise they'd have been able to get a decent photo and ID the drone which would give them something substantial to work on for tracking down the user (big commercial drones are not going to be sold in large enough numbers for this to be a dead end unlike some toy drones where you'd be looking at tens of thousands of units)
Id also suspect the operator isn't running this from a van or similar simply because of the crazy amount of survilence and ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) cameras in the UK, especially around London. All to easy to run a program to look for plate (or a lack of them) and so ID the van and then the user.
Switching plates would help dodge the ANPR but provide a way for real people viewing the surveillance tapes to spot it (same van different plates) so useful in the short term for a terrorist who is relatively ok getting caught or is going to run anyway but not so useful for angry anti Gatwick bloke who I suspect this will turn out to be
Techpriestsupport wrote: I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
What on earth are you banging on about? I don't know where you get your info from but you are severely misinformed.
Techpriestsupport wrote: I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
What on earth are you banging on about? I don't know where you get your info from but you are severely misinformed.
So you deny the D notice exists?
As to this incident I don't know what the doer is trying to do or say. If he wanted a simple panic that would be easy. A drone with a few small bags of red powder, like powdered chalk or dyed flour, could hover over a city and release the powder to be spread by the down wash of the rotors and produce instant massive panic as peolle stampede in terror of a possible chemical or biological attack. That would so simple and obvious anyone would think of it.
So this guy isn't trying to produce a panic, he could do that pretty easy.
Does england have anything like our No fly list? If so he may be on it possibly wrongly and as such is retaliating against what he sees as his persecution. Again I don't know if england has a no fly list. If it does i'm sure British police are investigating peolle on it.
Or maybe he was a fired worker at the airport with a grudge. Again I donct doubt authorities are looking at that.
But I think he bad a grudge against air travel or this airport. If he wanted mass panic the red powder idea that anyone smart enough to pull this off would have thought of would be a better option and more likely to produce some casualties as people fled in utter terror.
"I learned the hard way that if you take a stand on any issue, no matter how insignificant, people will line up around the block to kick your ass over it." Jesse "the mind" Ventura.
Techpriestsupport wrote: I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
What on earth are you banging on about? I don't know where you get your info from but you are severely misinformed.
So you deny the D notice exists?
They are advisory and in no way used in the manner that you seem to be insinuating. Regardless, it is off-topic and irrelevant to this case.
My personal feelings are that the disruption is being instigated by an environmental action group of some sort. I think it is too sophisticated to have just been a prankster.
Techpriestsupport wrote: I don't know what the doer is trying to do or say. If he wanted a simple panic that would be easy. A drone with a few small bags of red powder, like powdered chalk or dyed flour, could hover over a city and release the powder to be spread by the down wash of the rotors and produce instant massive panic as peolle stampede in terror of a possible chemical or biological attack. That would so simple and obvious anyone would think of it.
So this guy isn't trying to produce a panic, he could do that pretty easy.
Doubt there would be panic at all. In a university town, most would think it a student prank. The vast majority wouldn't even notice, beyond tutting at the annoying toy buzzing about. Most cities, if you look anywhere else than straight ahead, you're a tourist, who should be banned from the pavement while people are on their way to/from work.
Techpriestsupport wrote: I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
What on earth are you banging on about? I don't know where you get your info from but you are severely misinformed.
So you deny the D notice exists?
It's an entirely voluntary system applying only to major media outlets. Though people can face prosecution for broadcasting certain statements after the fact, no one in the UK is prevented from making 'unapproved statements'. Even on the state channels.
Does england have anything like our No fly list? If so he may be on it possibly wrongly and as such is retaliating against what he sees as his persecution. Again I don't know if england has a no fly list. If it does i'm sure British police are investigating peolle on it.
Or maybe he was a fired worker at the airport with a grudge. Again I donct doubt authorities are looking at that.
But I think he bad a grudge against air travel or this airport. If he wanted mass panic the red powder idea that anyone smart enough to pull this off would have thought of would be a better option and more likely to produce some casualties as people fled in utter terror.
The UK does have a no fly list but I don't think it likely that it's a protest against it. Most likely seems, to me, to be an environmental protest. We have a years long ongoing dispute about the expansion of airports in London.
They’re saying it’s not “terror related”, but it’s an effective terrorism tactic. Clearly everyone needs to wake up to the fact drones are a very cheap way to cause a huge amount of distruption and economic damage for which it is very difficult to be caught. Shutting down an international airport for a day and a half in the middle of the holiday season is far too easy for someone maliciously minded, and could be repeated over and over to seriously impact operations in a country.
Overread wrote: And yet at the same time you can freely buy chainsaws, cars, petrol, weed killer and a host of other items that are super dangerous if used in a certain way.
Thing is one must realise that the overwhelming majority of people don't want to do terrorist acts. We've had drones for years and this is the first major incident with them that's had far reaching impact on people. We have millions of cars on the road and lorries and dustcarts and other vehicles and no one regularly goes charging through pedestrians or building bombs out of weedkiller and petrol and the like.
Maybe first major but maybe we have been just lucky.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Howard A Treesong wrote: They’re saying it’s not “terror related”, but it’s an effective terrorism tactic. Clearly everyone needs to wake up to the fact drones are a very cheap way to cause a huge amount of distruption and economic damage for which it is very difficult to be caught. Shutting down an international airport for a day and a half in the middle of the holiday season is far too easy for someone maliciously minded, and could be repeated over and over to seriously impact operations in a country.
I really think that if you start to class economic fallout as terrorism, you are heading towards the suppression of all protest.
Rent strike = economic consequences = terrorism.
Fare strike = economic consequences = terrorism.
Mass demo closing major roads = economic consequences = terrorism.
and so on.
Terrorism has always been classed as violence in the pursuit of political ends.
Techpriestsupport wrote:I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
A drone with a loudspeaker could blare it out over a crowded area for some time, or carry a banner making an unapproved statement, of even use a laser projector to project a forbidden message on a building.
A drone can be used to make a public act of defiance and as such they'll be regulated by those in power before chainsaws which can only kill or injure a few peolle at most, so the state doesn't care.
You understand wrong. Completely.
The existence of D-notices lends no support whatsoever to a claim that a D-notice gets "slapped" on "anything the government doesn't like". Media reporting on the Brexit debacle also tends to disapprove your 'point'. I'm sure May would love to slap D-notices all over the humiliating evidence of her government's utter failure and incompetence, but she hasn't.
Techpriestsupport wrote: I think drones will be targeted for more control due to their ability to make public statements that those in power donct like. I understsnd in Britain anything the government doesn't want said gets a D notice stuck on it and that's that's it, it can't be discussed or else.
I'd love to know where you got that idea from.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
6000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 
4000 pts - 
1000 pts - 
1000 pts 
Heresy World Eaters/Emperors Children 
3100+
