The Gatwick Drone. Strange Explanations.

Remember the drone incident that closed Londons's Gatwick Airport last December ? Some unusual explanations have now come forward.

the drone's pilot "seemed to be able to see what was happening on the runway".

Well if that was the case then he or she could see what was happening but no one could see him or her.

the possibility an "insider" was involved

So someone inside the airport was either operating the drone or was feeding information to the drone operator. A drone operator that no one could find either if he was inside or outside the airport.

And whoever was responsible for the attack had "specifically selected" a drone which could not be seen by the DJI Aeroscope drone detection system that the airport was testing at the time

So how did he or she know what type of drone could not be detected ?

there are no verified pictures of the drone, and very few eyewitnesses have spoken publicly.

No surprise there then.

they had recorded 130 separate credible drone sightings by a total of 115 people, all but six of whom were professionals, including police officers, security personnel, air traffic control staff and pilots.

124 professional people but not a single photograph.

witnesses reported seeing an extremely fast-moving, large drone with bright lights.

However no one could track it's path to where it was being operated from.

At least one person noted the characteristic cross shape while others described it as "industrial or commercial" and "not something you could pop into Argos for.

So considering the size of the drone, it wasn't being operated within the airport. Unless security was so lax to be able to get it in.

www.bbc.com...

This all smacks of some type of cover up.

a reply to: alldaylong

Maybe it was a UFO cover up.

I have wondered if this was actually a UFO sighting, after all nobody has any pics, just eyewitness accounts and no drone operator ever found. I think 'drome' is a bit of a convenient excuse to be fair.


I presume when they said that they believed the Drone Operator could see the runway they mean
that they had a vantage point from which he could see it, rather than he was operating a drone with a camera on it, with which they could see the runway.

The only way I could see an insider being involved would be if it was a disgruntled employee, which I'm sure there will be, most big employers have them.

I guess if there was an insider they may well have information on what the anti-drone Aeroscope can pick up, no?

I'm not sure I share your suspicion of lack of photographs of the drone, I don't think I would have taken pics of it if I had witnessed it, though in this case it was being reported all day so I would have thought, given the calibre of the witnesses, as the day went on you might have expected one of them to snap some evidence, especially those in Security/Law Enforcement.

Thanks for updating this story, I actually found myself wondering what the outcome was last night and assumed, because it hadn't been broached here, nothing had come of it. I suppose this is almost as good as nothing coming of it...

The BBC were reporting that they have been told the drone was being piloted by someone with intimate details of airport procedures...