Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 90 posts

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#61

Post by DanBC »

pj_mukh wrote: post #52
Edd314159 wrote: post #5

> The suggestion there may not have been any drones at Gatwick Airport was a "miscommunication by police", a government source has told the BBC. > During a conference call between ministers, chaired by Transport Secretary Chris Grayling, it was agreed the 67 drone sightings were legitimate. ( https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-46670714 ) As much as "it was all a false alarm" would make a killer headline (and clear…

I think it's important we find out exactly how to quickly detect and stop these from happening next time. However, there's been 67 legitimate sightings and no pictures, videos? Not even grainy, badly zoomed video? Can the control tower see these using a simple set of binoculars?

Press reports that the drone operators were flying close to the control tower and flashing lights at the control tower.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/police-prepared-shoot-down-drone-0...

> Detectives were understood to have drawn up a shortlist of potential culprits after the pilot gave vital clues away by audaciously flying the drone right up to the air traffic control tower.

> In a move known as "buzzing the tower", it emerged the perpetrator had taunted airport staff by circling the drone around the building and flashing its lights, an industry source told The Daily Telegraph.

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#62

Post by paganel »

hodgesrm wrote: post #59
ComputerGuru wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the USA, courts ruled it was legal for police departments to discriminate based on intellect and refuse to higher persons with high IQs. They hire less smart people on purpose because they tend to question orders less and do what they are told more (their words, not mine).

You should cite a source for that. Where I live the cops are pretty on the ball. I recall one of them casually correcting my math on work-related problem when he was taking a report from me on another topic.

Where I live (Eastern Europe) the policemen are generally known as not being the brightest, there are countless jokes made about their intellect (or lack thereof) and propensity to generally follow orders without giving it a second thought. I've just checked and it seems that even the related Wikipedia [1] page has a section on this:

> Policemen: Most Romanian people are not fond of the law enforcement institutions and try to avoid contact with constables. Romanian public opinion about policemen says that they are primitive, uneducated and totally corrupt. Some of these police jokes belong to the absurd genre.

Q: How do you choose a stupid policeman from a group of policemen?

A: At random.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanian_humour#Stereotypes

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#63

Post by firmgently »

hodgesrm wrote: post #59
ComputerGuru wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the USA, courts ruled it was legal for police departments to discriminate based on intellect and refuse to higher persons with high IQs. They hire less smart people on purpose because they tend to question orders less and do what they are told more (their words, not mine).

You should cite a source for that. Where I live the cops are pretty on the ball. I recall one of them casually correcting my math on work-related problem when he was taking a report from me on another topic.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/too-smart-to-be-a-cop/ https://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/st...

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#64

Post by redcalx »

monochromatic wrote: post #41
redcalx wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paper's that did that made clearly libellous claims - because the couple had not yet been charged with an offence when their names were published. Those paper's can now expect libel claims against them, although given the clear breach of libel law I expect they will wish to settle out of court rather than take on the extra expense of a court case they can't win.

I’m not too familiar with UK libel law. Is it not a defense that they were reporting on statements they were given? Is there a reasonableness question?

As per a sibling comment, the names were leaked, they were not officially announced.

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#65

Post by wyck »

Angostura wrote: post #44
alt_f4 wrote: post #36

They also claimed these drones were "industrial specification". How did they determine that when they've never seen them? There should be some sort of penalty for blatantly lying to the public, even if it is done to save face about your incompetence.

Who was "they" can you find the on-the-record comment that suggested this?

The U.K. papers had diagrams of this said drone, including speculation of the actual model, cost($8k+) , I even saw a diagram of a superimposition of the drone over a airplane engine to show the relative size. They also mentioned the drone must have been hacked to bypass the built-in blackout software for airports.

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#66

Post by repolfx »

jacquesm wrote: post #43
benj111 wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So Brexit supporters are copying French fuel protesters even though we have a different fuel duty regime that isn't set by Europe, and they want to leave Europe (and by extension, France) anyway? That makes perfect sense.

For a real head twister: the various 'exit' and 'anti-eu' groups have tried to unite EU wide... That one still has me wondering if they realize what they are doing.

The EU doesn't and shouldn't have a monopoly on cross-Europe cooperation, so, I don't think your attempt to see irony there works.

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#67

Post by TomGullen »

huffmsa wrote: post #29
bigwheeler wrote: post #25

I just still can’t wrap my head around the fact that in 2018, with a camera attached to every waking persons hand (and some sleeping people too), how is it that there is not a single public photo or video published of this specific drone. Kind of reminds me of when I found out that tipping cows wasn’t a real thing...

Funny how UFO reports have generally decreased in the last decade. Pics or it didn't happen

Well that's because they are less bold now people have better cameras :P

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#68

Post by drcharris »

nickjackson wrote: post #40
bigwheeler wrote: post #25

I just still can’t wrap my head around the fact that in 2018, with a camera attached to every waking persons hand (and some sleeping people too), how is it that there is not a single public photo or video published of this specific drone. Kind of reminds me of when I found out that tipping cows wasn’t a real thing...

There is a daily mail video of a drone at the North Terminal Bus station. DM is hardly a good source, and I was sceptical at first but I'm 95% sure its the right location. The question is now, is the footage fake and is it from last week.

Link is https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1828378/Video-D...

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#69

Post by clort »

barry0079 wrote: post #10

Not before plastering the faces of an innocent couple nationwide. I think they deserve reparation for this.

Interestingly I heard that 'some media' had published their names yesterday and I thought that was pretty crass. I know several media organisations are that though so its not really a surprise, and I hope they manage to sue them for undue distress or whatever.

Today though, the BBC are saying " and from Crawley are saying that they feel completely violated by the media attention". I can't understand what is going through the editors mind when they approve sentences like that.. there is literally no reason any member of the public would need to know their names, and having the BBC repeat them on the hour every hour is just kicking them when they are already down.

Re: UK police release airport drone suspects, admit there may not have been drones

#70

Post by matt4077 »

tezza wrote: post #7

This country ( UK ) is highly prone to mass psychosis. Not really ascribing anything negative there, just an observation. A few winters ago there was minute by minute updates on Bird Flu. The press was covering swans and ducks found dead on the ground. Each individual fowl corpse was covered in breathless detail amongst infographics and timelines The government was manoeuvred into buying close to a billion pounds of…

This isn't mass psychosis because 'seeing a drone', even when mistaken, is not a symptom of anything. 'Mass delusion' may be closer to what you're referring to. But there's a certain aspect of fear or panic in the concept that just doesn't fit here: presumably, nobody would feel panic at the sight of a far-away drone unless they were about to board a plane?

In general, I doubt the UK is any more susceptible to such phenomena (cf Americans and their panic at the sight of a turban, or beard). You may also just be profiting from the benefits of hindsight, and throwing in a conspiracy theory for what exactly?

Post reply on HN