No drones but UFO's at Gatwick airport

Hello guys,

I've been lurking for years and haven't had anything to add until now.

I got a hold of the local news service near the Gatwick airport and extracted some really interesting information.

Yes I know two arrests have been made. No charges yet which is strange considering how pissed people are and that this is an international incident of epic proportions. Crawley news 24 has written a opinion piece today about this ongoing mystery. Funny how the headlines are like well now that an arrest has been made nothing to see here folks. There are many unanswered questions here that must be addressed before we can even say there was a drone. So until actual clear and fully contextualized video or photo is shown this is the best example of a real UFO in the true sense of the word. They have said there are drones. But where are they? Show us the drones. Anyways here is a list of of major unanswered questions that the security services are not answering. This is a cover up. What really happened at gatwick airport? We still don't know a damn thing.

Okay guys so this is shaping up to be a WEIRD one. I just got off the phone with a journalist over at the Crawley news 24 station and he had some amazing things to say. They are the closest to the airport and regularly cover goings on there.

There are so many unanswered questions going on, and according to him none of them are getting answers and everyone is going out of their minds trying to get them answered. Hopefully this is informative.

He and his news team traveled around the perimeter of the airport for hours looking for a sighting of the drone. Not only was there no sighting by him or his news team but while they were driving around the airport there were supposedly 50 more sightings while they saw nothing. He said you drive around the airport quite quickly as it's a small one.
The only people who have reported to have seen the "drone" are either A: employees of the airport or B: some one in the security services.
Not a single passenger has had a sighting other than the video released which shows the light moving in the sky that is thirty secs long that and the tabloids are publishing a photo of a black dot in the sky. He also said it is questionable that there is given zero context about the video or photograph showing where it was taken or how or when.
I asked if he thought it strange that it was able to stay in the air for so long and he said this is one of the most perplexing situations because this is true the average drone flight time is about 30 mins. (I saw a funny tweet at #gatwickdrone saying how duracell must be SH^%ing themselves right now over this "Modified drone" and its huge battery power.)
He said the security services had identified that it was an "Industrial drone" how ever if they figured that out then why could they not ID the type of drone and easily disable it with their frequency jammers?
Line of sight sightings should of have easily been able to follow this drone back to its operators while they changed out battery's.
Yes there have been two arrests of a middle class townhouse living 4x4 driving couple and apparently their employee was quoted as saying that the man was at work and friends of the women claim she has no interest in drones at all.
He said if there was something to charge them on considering this is an international incident that they would have been charged by now.
No drones have been found or have shown to be found, and no footage of the drone in action that is clearly identifiable have been found.
None of the security services are answering any of these questions
He joked with me saying this is starting to look very strange almost like a bonified conspiracy of some kind. "It's like there is a yeti in the woods or something"! LOL he says he is getting questions from alot of conspiracy theorists and lamented about this. I tried to keep things rational and mentioned nothing about UFOs in case you were wondering. (Ridicule coo coo factor....)
An incident like this happened last year too but was not given international coverage. The drones were spotted but were not found and the police could not find the operator either. (www.crawleynews24.co.uk...)
This is still a perfect UFO situation in every sense of the word. Until we are shown identifiable pictures or videos there is no drone to speak of folks.
False flag? I DONT KNOW BUT THIS GETTING CURIOUSER AND CURIOUSER Like Alice always says
Here is a really great opinion piece discussing some these strange happenings. (www.crawleynews24.co.uk...)

​

I'm going to keep my eyes on this one.

a reply to: Mendoparanormal

Thank-you for that thorough report! I get the feeling that evil people (aka terrorists) are testing something... a "dry run" sort of.

a reply to: carewemust

Yes it could be a test. I don't know whats going on there and what's not going on there. The journalist I spoke too was completely flabbergasted that some basic questions about this incident have remained unanswered. It's exciting to be on the beat so to speak. You can find 15 - 30 mainstream news reports and most of them are just parroting the AP syndicated news auto releases. There is almost zero original coverage going on and it is easy to see why. The only information coming out of this air port is from either employees or the security services. All you see now are that flights have resumed, two arrests have been made(a couple from the burbs), and how bummed everyone is that they didn't get to travel in time for the holidays. I understand that and it must be saddening to say the least. Over 100,000 people were supposedly affected by this incident. The security services are still asking for information and telling the general public that if they see a "drone" to call in the threat immediately. So much about this is genuinely fishy unless Im just retarded which is totally possible.

a reply to: Mendoparanormal

Thanks for your eyes and ears out there..
If the video is genuine about those people filming what's outside the plane and happened recently at Gatwick then it could be just another second O Hare story..?

Okay so there is another update here that basically confirms my suspicion that what ever happened at the Gatwick airport is wacky. Please check out this link I have provided. There are now so many inconsistencies to this story that it is simply mind boggling. Whomever is in charge of the PR work on this one has really botched the job so to speak.



Just to list a couple of the inconsistencies here you go but please check out the article for yourself. If you have been following this developing story then you will see what I mean. (www.bbc.com...)



Also here is an epic article form mother board that talks about how even if a pilot spots a balloon the FAA now classifys almost all sightings as drone. Interesting times indeed i say to the unnamed chinese proverb writer.(motherboard.vice.com...)



"

Sussex Police said there had been 67 reports of drone sightings - having earlier cast doubt on "genuine drone activity". (The journalist I spoke too said they travelled aorund the airport during these supposed sightings and saw nothing, adding that "its not a very large airport and you can drive around the perimeter quite quickly)

Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said no footage of a drone had been obtained. (Really?)

And he said there was "always a possibility" the reported sightings of drones were mistaken."(Yeah it's a possibility all right)

" However, he later confirmed the reported sightings made by the public, police and airport staff from December 19 to 21 were being "actively investigated". "(Okay so somebody saw something must have been a new rare species of pelican or something?)



"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." (If I had video of this "device" I would be #ting m,y pants right now as they are definitely going to confiscate it.)



"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". "(What the hell does he mean by device?)



"Flights were suspended for more than 36 hours when a "device" was first spotted close to the runway on Wednesday night.

(Must have been a mistake that the security services, police and passengers had made. how ever this is not the first time the airport has been shut down due to drone sightings... um excuse me device sightings there was no follow up investigation of the incidents last year to date no one has been found)

Det Ch Supt Tingley said the arrested man and woman had "fully co-operated" with inquiries after information was received from a member of the public." The couple have now been released with no charges. (And like the crawley news 24 journalist said they should have been charged already.)



"Gatwick Airport Limited has now offered a £50,000 reward through Crimestoppers for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for disrupting flights. " (Why would they need to offer a reward for a non sighting of a non drone? if it was all just a mistake?)



"About 1,000 aircraft were either cancelled or diverted, affecting about 140,000 passengers, during three days of disruption. "(I believe based on the multitude of reports in the media that somebody saw something here what it was we may never know.)



Authorities finally regained control over the airfield early on Friday after the Army deployed unidentified military technology. (How could they regain control if there was never a sighting of a "device" in the first place?) Is this the first time we have learned of actual military tech that can deter possible UFO's or am I just jumping to a conclusion here...you know wildy speculating?)



And from the telegraph even more confusing information. The police are saying that one of theory's is that there may never have been a device at all. (www.telegraph.co.uk...)



"

Police investigating the chaos and disruption at Gatwick Airport have admitted there may never have been a drone at all.

More than 140,000 passengers were affected by last week's shutdown of Britain's second busiest airport, which was ordered after almost 70 drone sightings were reported in the space of a few hours.

But after two people were released without charge following three days in custody, a senior Sussex detective said it was possible the sightings had simply been false alarms but denied the investigation was “back to square one”." (Welp we can all go home now folks there was never a drone there was never a device and thanks to the unidentified military technology we can rest easy know they are deterring nothing at all from the skys. oh thank jospehine jahosaphats!)



Anywho that's all for today, I'm certain this ain't over yet.

A faint whiff of bull# in this story. did I just say faint?, I meant. I can smell the #e from London here in central Scotland. Nothing new there though.

a reply to: Mendoparanormal

Heaven help us if an anonymous caller can shut down a major airport by threating to fly drones in the area!

a reply to: carewemust

Heaven help us if an anonymous caller can shut down a major airport by threating to fly drones in the area!

Probably just a trial run for what's in store after Brexit. Don't panic. Don't panic. Someone farted at the end of a runway and we shut an entire airport down.

They are just trying to toughen us up for when the insulin, asthma nebulisers, and various other much needed drugs don't get through.

a reply to: Soloprotocol

Is that the definition of a False Flag?

a reply to: carewemust

Is that the definition of a False Flag?

It would appear so.

150,000 people never got to Lapland to see Santa...Oh, Boo Hoo. 2000 people a week are dying from lack of medicine because of Brexit. Bad Drones. Bad drone operators.

I see a small aircraft only needing the first 500 feet of the runway to takeoff.

originally posted by: Mendoparanormal



Det Ch Supt Jason Tingley said no footage of a drone had been obtained. (Really?)

There is footage of a drone at Gatwick and it can be geo-located.

See following.

It can be geo-located to the Gatwick North Terminal covered walkway for the bus collection points.

See my post on this thread page.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

"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". "(What the hell does he mean by device?)

Device definition from Google search.

a thing made or adapted for a particular purpose, especially a piece of mechanical or electronic equipment.

Authorities finally regained control over the airfield early on Friday after the Army deployed unidentified military technology. (How could they regain control if there was never a sighting of a "device" in the first place?) Is this the first time we have learned of actual military tech that can deter possible UFO's or am I just jumping to a conclusion here...you know wildy speculating?)

"Gain control" as in once the anti-UAV and surveillance equipment was deployed they were confident that they had control or a better handle on the situation.

The military equipment deployed has been identified. One of the main systems deployed on a roof vantage point was the Israeli built Rafael Drone Dome.

See following links

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

A civilian company also deployed their Skyperion anti-UAV system. Footage of that was shown on various media news footage deployed around the airport perimeter.

metisaerospace.com...

See following link with video of Skyperion.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Other defence companies such as Leonardo were also giving TV interviews and showing anti-UAV equipment assisting the authorities at Gatwick.

www.leonardocompany.com...

a reply to: tommyjo

Yes they showed anti-UAV equipment and now that there is no footage of it being used to apprehend a drone it seems to be a little suspicious. The footage you link to of the alleged drone is totally unidentifiable as a drone therefore this is an actual UFO; an unidentified flying object. The police chief tingely himself is quoted as saying today on the BBC live that there is no footage of the "device" so this is strange to me beyond understanding. Also after they had claimed to have regained control on Thursday evening there was another sighting of the drone that shut down the airport for an additional 70 mins. So they didn't regain control of anything. How can they control a non-drone sighting? There is a claim by the police that they found a broken drone outside the airport somewhere however no photo has been shown and they are now saying that all the usable forensic evidence may have washed off in the rain. Did no one see the drone crash? Was the military drone dome responsible for the downing of the alleged drone? Why have they not claimed that there military tech worked to down this drone they have found? You might think that this would be a great triumph and something to report to the media. The article I linked to was posted today and they still are claiming that unidentified military equipment was being used. I suppose we can chalk that up to a editorial mistake. Still the inconsistencies are legion and people aren't taking it for one sec. Here is the picture that was taken early on in the fiasco by an easyjet pilot.

originally posted by: Mendoparanormal
a reply to: tommyjo

Yes they showed anti-UAV equipment and now that there is no footage of it being used to apprehend a drone it seems to be a little suspicious. The footage you link to of the alleged drone is totally unidentifiable as a drone therefore this is an actual UFO; an unidentified flying object. The police chief tingely himself is quoted as saying today on the BBC live that there is no footage of the "device" so this is strange to me beyond understanding. Also after they had claimed to have regained control on Thursday evening there was another sighting of the drone that shut down the airport for an additional 70 mins. So they didn't regain control of anything. How can they control a non-drone sighting? There is a claim by the police that they found a broken drone outside the airport somewhere however no photo has been shown and they are now saying that all the usable forensic evidence may have washed off in the rain. Did no one see the drone crash? Was the military drone dome responsible for the downing of the alleged drone? Why have they not claimed that there military tech worked to down this drone they have found? You might think that this would be a great triumph and something to report to the media. The article I linked to was posted today and they still are claiming that unidentified military equipment was being used. I suppose we can chalk that up to a editorial mistake. Still the inconsistencies are legion and people aren't taking it for one sec. Here is the picture that was taken early on in the fiasco by an easyjet pilot.

Even with the poor quality footage you can see the rotor arms of the drone. The footage was copied and uploaded to You Tube without the sound.

See following links with copies of the video with the sound. Some people were claiming that the footage was not taken at Gatwick when it can quite clearly be geo-located to the North Terminal area.

With the sound several people can be heard discussing what they are seeing.

Have you got the drone?
It's coming over your head! - Over your head!
Man with West Country accent. There's the B***** (Expletive deleted)
(Various other people swearing as they watch it)

Edit. I'll insert the video without sound for context. Again you can clearly see the rotor arm extensions of the drone even though it is poor quality footage.



Metro News Link

Daily Mail News Link

The Police Chief is probably referring to official footage not taken by members of the public. In earlier reporting he has said that they are still trawling through CCTV footage for any signs that drone activity was recorded.

Consider that the sighting that closed down the airport for 70 mins was a false alarm. Think about either a glitch in the surveillance equipment or a sighting of something flying over the airport. Birds of prey for example are regularly seen hunting near airports. All it takes is a mistaken sighting of a Barn Owl at distance and you can see how false alarms can be generated. Put yourself in the shoes of the incident commander - hence the temporary closure.

Think of the size of such a drone? If it is flying low and not sky lined it will be very difficult to see. Of course such a drone can crash undetected under such conditions. Even helo surveillance will find it difficult to detect both visually and with sensors. If it was a radio control with nitro/petrol driven engine there would be an infra red signature. Imagine how small if anything is detectable from an electric powered drone?

Of course some of the media are still reporting "unidentified military equipment". Some journalists and editors have no clue and make the easy comment.

a reply to: Mendoparanormal

I wouldn't post the OP if I wouldn't feel that this might be important enough to talk about it.

There's this story that came out like a few weeks ago from commercial airliners that they had encounters with unknown craft in their vicinity that didn't had typical aircraft features as we know them.

This was seen over Britain and I believe Ireland too?

Fascinating stuff.

As a Christian I have an interest in UFO's. Of course they can just be weather balloons etc.

But I think if it's not something of this world, I don't think it's from 'out there', but from 'down there'

I don't expect people to buy that (but you never know ha), but it surprises me that not many people considers UFO's from a Biblical perspective.

Don't worry i'm not here to talk about that in this thread, or de-rail the thread about it. It's just an interesting perspective and I wanted to post to share this possibility and also to be able join the thread.

As for what's really been seen. I think it's within the realms of possibility that people really have seen nothing, but, given everyone is about 'safety safety' - eg let's have safety so we can't be sued, then it's altogether possible that the establishment over-reacted to a flimsy observation by ground staff, and now they are just embarrassed and are hoping the interest goes away, rather than admit their over-reaction caused over 100,000 people to be delayed on their journeys.

Please look into the UFO incident that is still unfolding at the Gatwick international airport. Last week the military was called in due to over 200 sightings of an alleged "drone". However to this date no perpetrators were found operating drones and the most available drone tech only has a battery life of 30-35 minutes. Now the security services are claiming that no photo or video of the drone/s exists at all. I found this video and photo on the day that the sightings were occurring. Look into this guys, please. Even the media are starting to claim that something isn't adding up here. Unfortunately like most photos or videos of UFOs these people only had potato cams. Looks like we're not the only ones that have a hard time catching pictures of these elusive unidentified flying objects. There were thousands of people at the airport that day. How are there no photos or videos clearly showing that there was a drone there especially in these modern times. This same question is asked all the time here on this forum as if its some kind of definite proof that UFOs could not possibly exist. But unidentified flying objects do exist. People mis identify flying objects all the time. Dear ladies and gentleman of the /ufos sub reddit I would submit to you that until we are shown clear photos and videos of drones all we can assume is that people saw an unidentified object that they mis-identified as a drone that was also flying. I use the term UFO in the truest sense of the word here in keeping to the /ufos ethos. People saw an object in the sky that was flying that has not yet been identified.

Before you watch these videos remember it has been emphatically stated by the Sussex chief of police that there is no videos or photos of a drone, but that there were drones none the less. How does he have evidence of this?

So according to him these videos and photo are a complete farce.

So we are back at square one.

People witnessed an unidentified flying object because there has not been an identified flying object.

www.dailymail.co.uk... This was allegedly taken by a passenger on the day of the drone sightings. I can't tell WTF that is in the sky.

This other video was taken by a passenger on the plane on the day of the sightings as well.
www.youtube.com... once again this is an unidentified flying object. There was an object in the sky that was unidentified and was flying and it was called a drone. The semantics here can be a little tiring I know But I must emphasize that this looks like a Chicago O'hare 2006 mass sighting event. 2.0 I have been waiting for a modern day analog to the O'hare 2006 sighting and here it is folks. Please go look into this! The details are still emerging and it all looks really fishy.

a reply to: tommyjo

Thank you for your well thought out reply. I just want to state this very clearly once again. Whether or not this video you provided is a video of a drone it is as yet wholly insufficient for being able to positively identify that this UFO is a drone. This is the same argument people get into about photos or pictures of alleged UFOS. This object that is being filmed cannot be positively identified as a drone. This is an unidentified object that is flying. I do not know what this object is and I do not know what it is not. The people, employees, police, and passengers at the airport were all told that a drone was hovering above the airport for hours and even days. How could they know that there was a drone for sure unless they had seen it up close and had evidence that it was such? Are there interviews with passengers that saw it up close where they could unequivocally state and prove they saw a drone? If the guy in this video you linked to said "hey look there it is its a bird!". We would still not be able to id it as a bird. And so there is still no photo or video evidence clearly showing a drone. The only alleged evidence if we can call it that do the lack of context that does exist is of an object flying in the sky that is unidentified and cannot positively be identified as anything at all.

No real footage of drones.

However there are plenty of credible witnesses.

This appears to be something of a standard.

And it does call into question that the lack of good photos or videos calls into question that UFO's are just tricks. At an airport, there is plenty of photographic and surveillance equipment, and there are plenty of people who are trained to see something in the sky and not confuse it for an eg weather balloon.

The truth is out there folks, as they say.