 Poster: A snowHead
|
1. What if you miss/bullet goes through? Where does the bullet go/who's liable for injury/damage in the ~2.5 square mile landing area for said bullet?
Any different to shooting an armed intruder etc. and you miss ? Probably far less risky as you will be shooting up, preferably to within the airfield.
2. Where are all the bits going to go - if on the airfield you need to pick them all up to prevent them causing FOD (Foreign Object Damage), of off the airfield who's liable for injury/damage if bits land on them?
Airfields are well used to that, bits drop off planes, things blow in from who knows where etc. all the time. Off the airfield pretty much same answer as 1.
3. Again pretty much same answer as 1. there were no planes landing or taking off so the risk would be to those flying over to other airports. Temporarily divert them ?
I have no idea on the jamming stuff 
In the past during terrorist threats, as I remember, we have had tanks stationed on airports and presumably the intention was to use them if necessary. That makes the risk from having pot shots at a drone pale into insignificance I would have thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Low flying drone and small size, try that on a drone several hundred feet in the air and a more robust design
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| skitow wrote: |
1. What if you miss/bullet goes through? Where does the bullet go/who's liable for injury/damage in the ~2.5 square mile landing area for said bullet?
Any different to shooting an armed intruder etc. and you miss ? Probably far less risky as you will be shooting up, preferably to within the airfield. |
Actually very different and much higher.
It's very unusual for the authorities (in the UK) to use fire arms in open spaces, due to the risks of injuring innocent bystanders. Even when executing Brazillian electricians on the Tube they get one office to pin him down and then the others shoot down at point blank range.
Also when firing at a person you will normally be firing horizontally, so wind has minimal impact on trajectory and gravity only acts to pull the bullet down to ground level. In this case you're shooting up, so the bullet is exposed to more wind (air much more turbulent when able to move in three dimensions and not restricted by the ground/buildings) and for longer, as grivity only acts to slow the bullet's upwards travel, before then acting to accelerate it downwards again. While the fall of the bullet will tend to be chaotic, so at a much lower terminal velocity than it left the gun it's still going to sting a bit if it hits you/have enough force to smash glass.
This is of cource assuming you're using a rifled gun rather than a shotgun, the most likely to be using in your intruder scenario in the UK. A 12 bore shotgun only has an effective range of about 110m so for a start really easy for a drome to fly higher than that making them pointless. Second if you tried to shoot an intruder, missed and killed an innocent person that would generally be classified as manslaughter. Just hit them and you're still going to be looking at a custodial scentence.
| skitow wrote: |
2. Where are all the bits going to go - if on the airfield you need to pick them all up to prevent them causing FOD (Foreign Object Damage), of off the airfield who's liable for injury/damage if bits land on them?
Airfields are well used to that, bits drop off planes, things blow in from who knows where etc. all the time. Off the airfield pretty much same answer as 1. |
If the same as 1. then you might get away with negligence if you're lucky but, as the consiquence of your actions are easilly predictable I'd probably go with reckless endangerment.
Worst case, well it didn't go well for either the people in the Air France Concorde or the hotel it landed on, all triggered by a thin strip of aluminium smaller than many drones.
| skitow wrote: |
| 3. Again pretty much same answer as 1. there were no planes landing or taking off so the risk would be to those flying over to other airports. Temporarily divert them ? |
So shoot/jam the drone causing it to fly in an out-of-control way that sends it slamming in to the side of an empty A380 sat on the tarmac. Did that impact cause enough damage to the aircraft that might lead to a failure? At best that's a very expensive aicraft out-of-action to be fully NDTed (Non-Distrutive Tested) and maybe have to have a fuselage repair. If that was my aircraft I'd be looking for a big compensation cheque!
| skitow wrote: |
| In the past during terrorist threats, as I remember, we have had tanks stationed on airports and presumably the intention was to use them if necessary. That makes the risk from having pot shots at a drone pale into insignificance I would have thought. |
Much like only being able to take 100ml of liquids through security the tanks weren't there to form any sort of counter terror defence, they were just there to make people FEEL safe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Whatever, the police have today decided that taking pot shots, even with shotguns, might be worth trying.
From the BBC website :-
Sussex Police: Officers allowed to shoot drones
Speaking outside Gatwick Airport, Sussex Police's assistant chief constable, Steve Barry, said measures to tackle the drone threat include "technical, sophisticated options to detect and mitigate drone incursions, all the way down to less sophisticated options".
He added: "Even shotguns would be available to officers should the opportunity present itself."
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
Gatwick shut again after more sightings. What a *£"$*"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dafuq?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've often wondered about those old IRA funerals with guns being fired in the air (and other similar things). Does the bullet not ultimately come down at the same velocity with which it started out of the barrel of the gun? Or has my O level Physics let me down. Friction?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
I reckon a big 'normous electro magnet is the answer. Really big.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This country......
Helicopter with hook lines underneath.
Swamp the area with undercover polis to find the perps
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| I've often wondered about those old IRA funerals with guns being fired in the air (and other similar things). Does the bullet not ultimately come down at the same velocity with which it started out of the barrel of the gun? Or has my O level Physics let me down. Friction? |
My memory if physics is there is a max speed it will be travelling down with due to friction. Isn’t the definition of that terminal velocity?
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Fingers crossed, supposedly departing from LGW Sunday am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Suspension now lifted and flights taking off again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
| pam w wrote: |
| I've often wondered about those old IRA funerals with guns being fired in the air (and other similar things). Does the bullet not ultimately come down at the same velocity with which it started out of the barrel of the gun? Or has my O level Physics let me down. Friction? |
It is getting rarer, but roughly 50 people a year worldwide get killed by falling or stray bullets from celebratory gunfire.
Middle East, Asia, Balkans, etc.
A falling bullet from the sky will drop at 150-200mph.
A bullet will penetrate human skin at 100-150mph.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
Difference, for one, being that a falling bullet will be tumbling and often deformed to a degree (copper etc jacket excepted) therefore could hurt, could injure, but unlikely to penetrate as it would if fired with intention of entering target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
As Grizzler said a gun barrel has rifling that imparts axial spin to the bullet that keeps it pointing its most aerodynamic, 'pointy end' first. This minimises speed loss due to friction and also increases accuracy.
If fired in to the air and not hitting anything most of this rotation will have been lost by the time the bullet apogeea, so on the way back down it just tumbles. This means a lot more friction so a much lower velocity when it gets back to ground level than it left the gun with (though still not exactly fun to be on the receiving end of).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
Why, I ask, all the (classic snowflake) hand-wringing...........? I know, that's a rhetorical question.
Given the ungodly damage/ruination and costs manifested - directly AND indirectly which ARE measurable (let that marinate), and deliberate at that, my "two cents" sez track any and all down - everyone and anyone, extract as much info regarding any and all by any and all means - no restrictions whatsoever, pure Tower of London methodology plus, plus, and then fully dispatch. Make an example, set an example. Send a message loud and clear and if more in the future, repeat. Eventually attrition sets in. We are way past time for being remotely compassionate, dignified or civil.
Last edited by Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person on Sun 23-12-18 1:43; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
@arcsinice, I’m all for robust action, commensurate to any proven crime. This sabotage is completely unacceptable.
But I hope we don’t descend to torture or lynch mob justice, which I infer from your post is what you’re advocating (‘extract info by any means, Tower of London methodology’).
Wishing you compassion, dignity and civility of the season.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| PeakyB wrote: |
@arcsinice,
But I hope we don’t descend to torture or lynch mob justice, which I infer from your post is what you’re advocating: |
I do.
Take them to the tower. Put them in the stock and fly drones without blade Guards at them continually. I suspect there will be 110,000 volunteers sat waiting at gatwick.
That'll do the trick
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
Heres a fun aside. Went up to Hemel today and both times passing by Heathrow our GPS in the car reported going offline... Looks like 'they' have pushed out a GPS exclusion zone around the airports.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
That'll be fun for the nav systems on the planes then 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Richard_Sideways wrote: |
| Heres a fun aside. Went up to Hemel today and both times passing by Heathrow our GPS in the car reported going offline... Looks like 'they' have pushed out a GPS exclusion zone around the airports. |
Maybe, but I’ve often had my GPS go offline near LHR anyway. There are spots near T4 where the other radio signals just seem to swamp it.
A ‘GPS exclusion zone’ wouldn’t necessarily stop a drone. Most do use GPS, but can also be flown without it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@Mjit, “So shoot/jam the drone causing it to fly in an out-of-control way that sends it slamming in to the side of an empty A380 sat on the tarmac. Did that impact cause enough damage to the aircraft that might lead to a failure? At best that's a very expensive aicraft out-of-action to be fully NDTed (Non-Distrutive Tested) and maybe have to have a fuselage repair. If that was my aircraft I'd be looking for a big compensation cheque!”
Drones don’t go out of control if you jam them, they just return to base/hover in situ/land. If you shot the drone and it went haywire (unlikely) then it’s not going to even scratch the paint on an aircraft as it falls.
“A 12 bore shotgun only has an effective range of about 110m so for a start really easy for a drome to fly higher than that making them pointless. “ I agree about the height issue, but it’s even worse than that. The pellets may travel 110m, but the pattern would be so huge you’d be unlikely to hit anything even if your aim was spot-on and the penetrat8ng power of the pellets would be minimal. An effective range of a shotgun is probably around 50m.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
@foxtrotzuku I think you're probably correct and that's what should, and probably would happen. I was just taking the view of the people doing the risk assessments on the different options. It's a new situation, there are plenty of expensive potention negative outcomes, and of course killing one drone will probably have made it harder to trace the pilot(s) and done nothing to stop them going out and buying another one and doing it all over again tomorrow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
@skitow,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@albob, Easy for me to say this in retrospect but I always had a suspicion that they might turn out to be the wrong people.
@Mjit, I think most people have dramatically underestimated the difficulty in shooting down a drone with a rifle. A bullet falling vertically is extremely unlikely to hurt anyone/anything, but most bullets don’t fall vertically and a bullet fired at 45° might still retain much of its energy when it come back down.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Here is a chart of the 308 Winchester at 3200'ps with a Sierra MK bullet. The ballistics would look like this:
JBM Maximum Distance Output
Input Data
Manufacturer: Sierra Description: .308 dia. 150 gr. HPBT MatchKing™
Muzzle Velocity: 3200.0 ft/s
Temperature: 59.00 °F Pressure: 29.92 in Hg
Humidity: 0.0 % Altitude: 0 ft
Std. Atmosphere at Altitude: No Corrected Pressure: Yes
Calculated Parameters
Atmospheric Density: 0.07647 lbs/ft³ Speed of Sound: 1116.5 ft/s
Initial Angle: 30.0 deg Terminal Angle: 62.9 deg
Terminal Range: 4476.7 yds Terminal Velocity: 413.9 ft/s
Terminal Time: 28.082 s Terminal Energy: 57.1 ft•lbs
Source https://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=241085
So although starting with approx 2648 ft lbs muzzle energy it will still carry 57 ft lbs at over 4km away (potentially lethal and a heavier bullet will carry more energy). For comparison a .22 long rifle will have a muzzle energy of approx 100 to 150 ftlbs and a non licenced UK air rifle will have a sub 12 ftlbs muzzle energy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
The drone perps are still at large.
Wonder if they will pop up at another airport.
Not safe flying in UK while the baddies are out there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
And now it seems there might have been no drones after all...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@pam w, after their earlier ‘possibly no drones’ statement, Police now saying that was just ‘poor communication’.
Investigation doesn’t seem to be going well. So frustrating for all affected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
hearing the south runway has now re opened for departures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
For military drone one needs military counter measures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Looks like Russia is really turning up the heat in UK!
Every few weeks, some major infrastructure goes down.
Banks, airports, city centers, etc.
It's chaos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Strangely the same media who hyped up the original rumour are making rather less fuss about the
fact that they were, in fact, completely mislead. I can't help thinking that a law which said that the
apology and retraction for publishing stuff which is misleading ought to be of the same magnitude as the
original publication was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Seems to me the media weren't the only ones hyping things up, but at least the cops have coughed up for one of their errors.
"A married couple from Crawley were arrested by Sussex Police and held in a police station for 36 hours on the basis that they owned a collection of model aircraft. They were released without charge after questioning. In June 2020 Sussex police paid the couple £200,000 in an out of court settlement. "
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
@skitow, a case of Aileron-ful Arrest... I'll get my coat...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
