It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Timeline of Gatwick UFO Sightings

page: 1
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:14 PM
link   
As far as i'm aware, we're still waiting on eye-witness statements for the UFO sightings at Gatwick Airport to be released publicly.

Although we don't have their statements yet (if we ever get them), I found this really interesting list of the people who reported the sightings:


December 19 - 9pm
An airport security officer finishing work reported seeing two drones flying near Perimeter Road South, describing their cross shape and flashing lights.

December 19 - 9.30pm
Six people, including five police officers, reported within 15 minutes of each other seeing a drone, with white and red lights, near the runway.

December 20 - 1.15am
Six people – three airport workers and three police officers – reported over 30 minutes seeing a drone near the runway.

December 21 - 5pm
Again six people – a member of the public and five police officers – reported seeing a drone near a hangar.

December 21 - 7.15pm
A pilot reported seeing a drone near a stand on the airfield. The account was corroborated by a member of staff.


www.mylondon.news...

So we have -
An Airport Security Officer
5 Police Officers
A further 3 Airport Workers and 3 Police Officers
A further 5 Police Officers
A Pilot along with a member of cabin crew

I think it's fair to say, with visual ID's coming from police officers, a pilot and a cabin crew member, that we have credible sightings.

As of just now, that figure has risen to 93 credible sightings,


Officers are looking into "relevant sightings" by 115 witnesses, including 93 from "credible witnesses" such as a pilot, airport staff and police officers.


news.sky.com...

Police draw a blank in their search:


Giles York, Sussex Police chief constable, said 26 sites had been searched and two damaged drones recovered – only for them both to be ruled out of the inquiry.


www.independent.co.uk...


So .... what is it? I don't doubt we'll get numerous threads about the Gatwick drones, but, isn't it time to put our hands up and admit something was there, and, we can't explain it?

Please post any thoughts, or any updates, or if you're close to the airport, perhaps you could share any eye witness testimonies?
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: typo




posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:33 PM
link   


So .... what is? I don't doubt we'll get numerous threads about the Gatwick drones, but, isn't it time to put our hands up and admit something was there, and, we can't explain it?
How is it not explained by remote controlled drones? Especially when the witnesses recognized them as drones?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage



So .... what is? I don't doubt we'll get numerous threads about the Gatwick drones, but, isn't it time to put our hands up and admit something was there, and, we can't explain it?
How is it not explained by remote controlled drones? Especially when the witnesses recognized them as drones?


115 Witnesses but not one of them took a photograph of whatever it or they where.

To use a ATS phrase " Pic's or it didn't happen "

Anyone smell fish ?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:49 PM
link   
a reply to: alldaylong

I often see drones. Never taken a picture of one.
Why? Because it's a drone.

I don't take pictures of airplanes either.

edit on 12/29/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage



So .... what is? I don't doubt we'll get numerous threads about the Gatwick drones, but, isn't it time to put our hands up and admit something was there, and, we can't explain it?
How is it not explained by remote controlled drones? Especially when the witnesses recognized them as drones?
That's easy.

Civilian definition of drone means a remote controlled craft.

The aviation definition means unmanned aircraft system (UAE), so really it is just another way of saying UFO.
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Assemble

Not really. The witnesses seemed quite specific about what they saw.



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Indeed. Even when it is proven not to be anything mystic or ET related, it MUST BE visitors from another realm. They are hiding the truth, who ever 'they' are lol. I just don't get it at all. Was more surprised to see this thread actually. Edit to add, I don't take pictures of planes and drones either. Well, I have taken pics of planes on a tarmac at an airshow lol!

edit on 12-29-2018 by vance because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Assemble

Not really. The witnesses seemed quite specific about what they saw.
What witness?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: vance

Criticizing it doesn't help. Some of the best resources of the UK have drawn a blank.
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assemble

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Assemble

Not really. The witnesses seemed quite specific about what they saw.
What witness?
The witnesses in YOUR timeline. I am super convinced these were drones though I was not there, I see so many here in Florida it is much easier to take the witnesses for their word. Have a nice day.



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage





I often see drones. Never taken a picture of one. Why? Because it's a drone



Not everyone is you Phage.



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assemble

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Assemble

Not really. The witnesses seemed quite specific about what they saw.
What witness?

The ones specified in your OP.



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:09 PM
link   
a reply to: vance

I already explained in an earlier earlier post that civilian definition of drone is different from aviation definition.

So as far as your concerned some guy has fooled the UK security services?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:28 PM
link   
This is what's classed as an aviation drone (UAE)



Which ended up outrunning the F18 Super Hornet which filmed it.

So you could imagine how hard it is to get a photograph of these things.
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Assemble


Which ended up outrunning the F18 Super Hornet which filmed it.

It did? How do you know this?

Is that what the witnesses described in Gatwick?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

The video footage was released by the US Department of Defense is how I know.

en.wikipedia.org...

You'll find the usual skeptics even on that report trying to come with all sorts of explanations, rather than acknowledged it was tracked and filmed, for instance


USS Princeton's radars and the Super Hornets' electro-optical sensors and radars could have all malfunctioned,


Yeah, right.

It's close to what Gatwick observers seem to be describing, because it's small and difficult to describe. If you watched that video, how would you describe it if someone asked you? It's not easy.
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Assemble




The video footage was released by the US Department of Defense is how I know.

Your video source:

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet encountered this apparent UFO off the East Coast of the United States in 2015.
This does not seem to have much to do with the wikipedia link you provided. Nor does the wikipedia link say anything about the Hornets being "outrun."


If you watched that video, how would you describe it if someone asked you? It's not easy.
On the other hand, visually recognizing a drone for what it is, is quite easy. And many people in Gatwick seem to have done so.

edit on 12/29/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Assemble

I feel that I must be missing something here. On the one hand you say there are 93 credible witnesses who reported seeing drones, yet on the other you say there is something we can't explain. Are you saying that 93 credible witnesses can all be wrong? What are you saying? Do I bail now and write off the 10 minutes I've already invested in this thread as time that I'll never get back, or do I hang on for the ride and watch it burn itself out in some absurdist vortex?



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 02:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Assemble




The video footage was released by the US Department of Defense is how I know.

Your video source:

A U.S. Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet encountered this apparent UFO off the East Coast of the United States in 2015.
This does not seem to have much to do with the wikipedia link you provided. Nor does the wikipedia link say anything about the Hornets being "outrun."


If you watched that video, how would you describe it if someone asked you? It's not easy.
On the other hand, visually recognizing a drone for what it is, is quite easy. And many people in Gatwick seem to have done so.
The footage took place in 2004, but there was a large piece run on it in 2015, which must be what the youtube video is referring to.

You can verify this at numerous media sources. Here's a maintsream one, www.nytimes.com...

The pilot confirms that the UFO/drone outran it,


“I have no idea what I saw,” Commander Fravor replied to the pilot. “It had no plumes, wings or rotors and outran our F-18s.


I see you struggled to provide an description what it looks like - you didn't provide one, this will be the same problem that Gatwick spotters had too. The best word I would have would be 'drone'. If you refer to what media reports say about the 'drone' at Gatwick airport, is that it's 'industrial', that it's 'modified'. The police helicopter couldn't keep up with it,


Despite a huge manhunt, the mystery drone pilot continued to taunt Army snipers dotted along the runway, helicopters and 20 police units.


www.dailymail.co.uk...

It is because it is not a drone in the way you keep insisting it is, as if it's bought from a toy store, but an unmanned aerial vehicle, which is also the airport terminology for drone - that doesn't mean something you buy at a toy store or even at a specialist outlet.
edit on 29-12-2018 by Assemble because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 29 2018 @ 02:08 PM
link   
a reply to: lacrimoniousfinale

I'm saying that based on all the currently available information, it can't be a standard drone like we think of in civilian terms, something that's bought from a toy shop or even from a specialist outlet.

I'm saying it's real and not imagined, I don't doubt all the sightings.

So I am asking what you think it is.

To me it is either
1. Advanced military technology
2. Technology which is not known to any military
3. My own personal interest in this is that I think that UFO's - and so far all indications are that it is a UFO in the colloquial sense, are demonic in origin. As a Christian I go for the supernatural explanation, but of course it could be either of the first two on my list.

Any thoughts on what it could be?




top topics



 
8
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join