Danke, do something

[MENTION=6186]Danke[/MENTION]

Yer boss is a dick. You can tell him I said that.



Skyrocketing seat selection fees enrage flyers, enrich airlines

https://www.usatoday.com/story/trav...merican-delta-preferred-seat-fees/2293721002/

Dawn Gilbertson, USA TODAY Published 9:00 p.m. ET Dec. 18, 2018 | Updated 9:28 a.m. ET Dec. 19, 2018

There is nothing special about aisle seat 18D on Delta Air Lines Flight 2876 from Atlanta to New York.

No extra legroom, free drinks or priority boarding.

But try to reserve it for a January weekend getaway and a price tag pops up: $59.99. One way. On top of the ticket price.

Seat 18D is an ordinary aisle seat on American Airlines, too, but it'll cost you $39 one way to reserve it on a flight between Dallas and Boston in mid-February. Prefer 12D a few rows up? That'll be $43. 12E, a lowly middle seat, is going for $36.

Seat selection fees, once the province of no frills discount airlines like Spirit and Allegiant, have become big business for major airlines – and a source of frustration and confusion for travelers.

They are prevalent and pricey at American and Delta, and United starting selling them on Dec. 14, a move the company announced in August. United appears to be starting slow, with limited seats per flight and an initial fee of $9 each way, according to a spot check of routes by USA TODAY.

The seat assignments for sale are "preferred'' seats, so named because they are in areas of the plane airlines say passengers prefer, such as aisle and window seats closer to the front.

United President Scott Kirby, a pioneer of seat fees when he was president of US Airways a decade ago, has long said paying different prices for seats on a plane, even if the only perk is getting off sooner than other passengers, is no different than paying higher prices for seats closer to the front at a concert or sporting event.

Brett Snyder, a former airline employee who writes the Cranky Flier blog and runs a travel service called Cranky Concierge, calls that a "completely ridiculous comparison.''

"It's not like you need a view of the pilot here,'' he said.

TODAY IN THE SKY: November route roundup: Where airlines are adding service

Bob Denny calls preferred seats a ripoff. Denny, who lives in Ohio and travels overseas for his job as an anti-terrorism assistance instructor for the U.S. Department of State, says he paid about $65 for what he thought was a seat upgrade on an Atlanta-Paris flight on Delta partner Air France in September. Like many business travelers, he paid for the "upgrade'' with his own money to stay compliant with his company's travel policy.

For that price, Denny figured he was in the extra legroom seats in the front of the economy cabin.

He wasn't. He had purchased a "preferred'' aisle seat in what he called the "sardine'' section. He tried to get a refund but has had no luck.

"I think it's a fleecing,'' he said. "There's nothing preferred about it.''

Airlines get plenty of questions and complaints about preferred seats on social media.

[MENTION=23446]delta[/MENTION] Wow. Had no idea that "preferred" seat was code for a regular seat. My bad. Please cancel and refund my other purchase.
— Chris Hamm (@butterflyology) May 10, 2016

Flying on #americanair and already dreading it. Why? $99 for a "preferred seat" in the same class? Not an upgrade but a "preferred seat"?! Why can't you get it right , [MENTION=20960]americana[/MENTION]ir ? It is a full flight thus the seat will be given away anyway for free. [MENTION=23446]delta[/MENTION] I miss you! #Deltapic.twitter.com/cYjEko1D5H
— SallyD (@SmileForSmurfs) December 12, 2018

Airlines are making a bundle of money selling seat assignments that used to be free

The government doesn't require airlines to disclose seat fee revenue as it does with bag fees and reservation change fees, and airlines don't publicly break them out. (Except for Southwest, which doesn't assign seats but took in $358 million from its version of a seat fee called EarlyBird check in.)

Veteran travel analyst Henry Harteveldt, co-founder of Atmosphere Research Group in San Francisco, estimates seat selection fees generate "well north of'' half a billion dollars a year for large airlines that charge them.

"It could be substantially higher,'' he said.

Harteveldt says he recently booked a flight on an airline on which he doesn't have elite frequent flyer status (elite members generally can book preferred seats for free.) When he pulled up the seating chart, all that was available to reserve without extra charges were center seats.

"I coughed up about $48 to have a window seat,'' he said.

Jay Sorensen, president of airline consulting firm IdeaWorks and an expert on airline ancillary revenue, said the the adoption of seat assignment fees in the last two years has been surprisingly rapid.

"The big three – American, Delta, United – have been going down this path of copying the playbook from the low cost carriers,'' he said.

Sorensen says airline seat fees are now a strong second to baggage fees (when you include fees to upgrade to airlines' economy seats with extra legroom and other perks. Delta calls it Comfort Plus, American, Main Cabin Extra and United Economy Plus.

Airlines are up front about preferred seats but passengers are still confused

Harteveldt says he fields questions from friends about the difference between preferred seats and seats with extra legroom.

"You have to plan and book trips with your eyes wide open,'' he said. "There's nothing preferred about it.''

Snyder calls preferred seat fees a form of bait and switch. Airlines like Delta, United and American created no frills Basic Economy fares for budget sensitive travelers in the past few years, with restrictions including no free advance seat assignments. During booking, they try to get travelers to pay more for a regular economy by touting the perks you get over a basic economy ticket.

Except one of the biggest perks, a seat assignment, now carries a caveat: Fees may apply.

United CEO Oscar Munoz defended seat fees on a conference call with reporters in mid-December. He dismissed the suggestion that airlines risk alienating customers with more "nickel and diming'' for things like seats closer to the front of the plane, and noted that "everyone'' is doing it.

Munoz said preferred seat fees are simply part of the industry's move toward cabin "segmentation," carving up each plane's real estate to offer different things to different travelers. It's all about customer choice, he said.

"There's certainly not a piss off the customer factor in anything we do,'' Munoz said.


Harteveldt wonders if airlines' tone on seat fees will change during the next economic downturn.

"The airlines have what one of my grandfathers would call a high-class problem: right now demand is strong, people are traveling,'' he said.

"I think that there is a risk, we may be pushing some of these fees and the monetization almost too far. I think the airlines are going to have have to be careful about the seat assignments.''

Five things to know about those pesky airline seat fees

1. No, you don't have to buy a seat assignment. Skip over those color coded pricey premium and "preferred'' seats and look for free seats during booking if you're not particular about where you sit. There are usually plenty of free window and aisle seats at the time of booking, often in the back half of the plane, especially if you book tickets in advance. If there aren't any free seats or all that is left are middle seats, you can select a seat for free during online check-in or at the airport. You might snag your coveted aisle or window seat at that time, or could be stuck in the middle.

2. Yes, there's a good chance you won't be seated next to family members, friends or colleagues traveling with you if free seats are scarce and you don't pay up for a seat assignment. Airlines say, however, that talk of families with young children being separated by the seat fee policy are overblown. American says its reservation system automatically sits an adult and child younger than age 14 without seat assignments together 48 hours after ticketing so the child won't be seated alone. Some seats are also blocked until the day of departure out to accommodate scattered families at the gate.

3. There's a big difference between a preferred seat in economy and a premium seat in economy. A preferred seat is an ordinary economy seat airlines are charging extra for simply given its location on the plane. It could be a window, aisle or even middle seat closer to the front of the plane for a quicker exit upon landing. Premium seats, in contrast, generally come with extra legroom, priority boarding, dedicated bin space and free drinks, all at the front of the economy cabin. (Policies vary by carrier.)

4. You can pay as much or more for a seat assignment than checked bags on some flights. American Airlines is selling preferred seats on a flight between Charlotte, North Carolina, and Aruba over President's Weekend for $36 to $40 per person. The new baggage fee norm on major carriers except Southwest is $30 for the first bag and $40 for the second bag. And the fees are per person each way.

5. Not all airlines charge them. Southwest doesn't have assigned seats so thus no seat fees, though the airline recently raised prices for its EarlyBird Check In option, a version of a seat fee that ranges from $15 to $25 per passenger each way. JetBlue Airways and Alaska Airlines don't charge extra for regular seat assignments in coach.
 
Airlines are making a bundle of money selling seat assignments that used to be free

I had to pay extra so my mom and stepfather could sit next to each other on their flights. I bought the tickets at the same time so it's not like I was making an exceptional request.
 
I had to pay extra so my mom and stepfather could sit next to each other on their flights. I bought the tickets at the same time so it's not like I was making an exceptional request.

Yeah I got ripped off on this shit in Oct on my last flight . I hate to drive 1100 miles but it is what I will be doing next time .
 
Britain’s second-busiest airport has been shut for more than 13 hours on Wednesday night and Thursday morning, forcing hundreds of planes to be diverted, after two drones were spotted over the runway.
Officials said Thursday morning that police were still trying to bring the remotely-piloted vehicles down over Gatwick Airport, about 25 miles outside London.
More than 10,000 passengers have been affected, with some flights having to be diverted as far afield as Paris and Amsterdam.
The drones were first spotted at 9 p.m. on Wednesday night, causing the runway to be shut until around 3 a.m. Then, 45 minutes later, the drones were spotted again and the runway closed for a second time.
[h=2]Who is piloting the drones?[/h]The authorities don’t know. Police were combing the surrounding areas overnight and into Thursday morning in an attempt to catch the operators.
“Each time we believe we get close to the operator the drone disappears,” Justin Burtenshaw, the official in charge of the operation, told the BBC. “When we look to reopen the airfield, the drone reappears, so I’m absolutely convinced it is a deliberate act to disrupt Gatwick airport.”
“There has been no intelligence that this is going to happen. This is just a random act that has happened overnight,” he said.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/rogue-drones-shut-down-britain-115208746.html
 
Britain’s second-busiest airport has been shut for more than 13 hours on Wednesday night and Thursday morning, forcing hundreds of planes to be diverted, after two drones were spotted over the runway.
Officials said Thursday morning that police were still trying to bring the remotely-piloted vehicles down over Gatwick Airport, about 25 miles outside London.
More than 10,000 passengers have been affected, with some flights having to be diverted as far afield as Paris and Amsterdam.
The drones were first spotted at 9 p.m. on Wednesday night, causing the runway to be shut until around 3 a.m. Then, 45 minutes later, the drones were spotted again and the runway closed for a second time.
Who is piloting the drones?

The authorities don’t know. Police were combing the surrounding areas overnight and into Thursday morning in an attempt to catch the operators.
“Each time we believe we get close to the operator the drone disappears,” Justin Burtenshaw, the official in charge of the operation, told the BBC. “When we look to reopen the airfield, the drone reappears, so I’m absolutely convinced it is a deliberate act to disrupt Gatwick airport.”
“There has been no intelligence that this is going to happen. This is just a random act that has happened overnight,” he said.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/rogue-drones-shut-down-britain-115208746.html
In what has become an unceasing nightmare for thousands of travelers, Gatwick Airport could be closed for another full day as even the British Army has struggled to find the pilot operating several drones that have been spotted flying over the airport's air field, paralyzing Europe's eighth largest airport during one of the busiest travel weekends of the year. A spokesperson for the airport warned travelers to stay away from the airport "for the foreseeable future including tomorrow".
A Gatwick Airport spokesperson says passengers should not come to the airport "for the foreseeable future including tomorrow"
— Sky News Breaking (@SkyNewsBreak) December 20, 2018
Sky News shared this video to remind the public of the damage that a drone can cause an airplane, which prompted us to wonder: What's really going on here?
See what damage a drone can cause to a plane.

Scientists at the University of Dayton research institute show us why it is important to regulate drones near airports.

Get more on this story here: https://t.co/KEKsmcJrcP pic.twitter.com/y4Yz7yDHui
— Sky News (@SkyNews) December 20, 2018
Because something about this picture just doesn't look right:
* * *

More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...ds-stranded-gatwick-airport-mysterious-drones
 
After cancelling hundreds of flights during a 36-hour closure spurred by drones flying over its runway (drones that proved suspiciously resistant to police and military efforts to disable them), Sussex's Gatwick airport has reopened for a limited number of flights on Friday as the military has apparently found a method to "stop further drone disruptions," according to the Guardian.
While Gatwick has managed some arrivals and departures already, at least 100 of the 735 flights scheduled for Friday are expected to be canceled. Transport Secretary Chris Grayling insisted passengers will be safe even though the drone operators haven't been apprehended (once they are, they could face up to five years in prison, not to mention the concentrated ire of a public made furious by the inane disruptions to the travel plans of thousands of people).
2018.12.21gatwick.JPG

And although nobody has been arrested for operating the drones, the BBC reported that police have identified suspects. Investigators are operating on the assumption that more than one drone was involved in the disruptions, though the drones that terrorized the airport - causing some 120,000 holiday travelers to miss their flights - have not been captured. Delays of up to two hours or more are expected.
Speaking during the press conference in the last half an hour, Assistant chief constable Steve Barry said measures to tackle the threat include: "technical, sophisticated options to detect and mitigate drone incursions, all the way down to less sophisticated options - even shotguns would be available to officers should the opportunity present itself."
He added: "In terms of motivation there is a whole spectrum of possibilities, from the really high end criminal behaviour all the way down to just individuals trying to be malicious."
The union representing Gatwick's pilots remains "concerned" about the drone threat, which may give some travelers pause.
We have issued our advice on drones to our members in the wake of the Gatwick incident. BALPA’s information is that Gatwick has been reopened despite the rogue drone or drones remaining undiscovered. (1/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
We understand that detection and tracking equipment has now been installed around the perimeter of Gatwick and the expectation is that if and when the drones reappear, they will be detected and the airport will close again. (2/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
It is up to the relevant authorities to decide whether it is safe to re-open Gatwick given that the rogue drone is still around and may be expected to fly again. (3/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
BALPA is not aware that any special advice has been given to pilots operating into or out of Gatwick and so we have this morning ensured that all our UK pilots have BALPA’s advice on what to do if they see a drone while flying. (4/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
BALPA remains extremely concerned at the risk of a drone collision. It is possible that the rogue drones may go undetected around the perimeter or could obstruct the flight paths outside the immediate detection zone. (5/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
Given this continuing threat we have this morning issued our advice to pilots about steps to be taken if a drone is sighted. (6/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
The summary of our guidance can be found on our website: https://t.co/1b57OeaJd1 (7/7)
— BALPA (@BALPApilots) December 21, 2018
Should they return, shooting down the drones - which had previously been ruled out due to fears about damage caused by stray bullets - is now being considered as an option. But no drones have been seen over the runway since 10 pm local time on Thursday.
The news of the reopening will come as a relief to travelers: Yesterday, airport officials had warned that the airport would be closed "for the foreseeable future."
While the Gatwick incident appears to be on its way toward resolution, the broader problem highlighted by the issue - how did one unmanned drone manage to create so much chaos? - remains unresolved. And while Parliament will likely soon pass regulations imposing stricter oversight on drones and drone buyers (inspired by images of pregnant women sleeping uncovered on a cold airport floor), now that this Pandora's Box has been opened, what are airports around the world doing to prevent copycat attacks (authorities in the UK say they don't believe the incident was an act of terror).
That is, assuming the official narrative here is the entire story, something that observers are beginning to doubt.



https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...drone-closure-police-close-arresting-suspects
 
Superintendent James Collis said “As part of our ongoing investigations into the criminal use of drones which has severely disrupted flights in and out of Gatwick Airport, Sussex Police made two arrests just after 10pm on 21 December.
“Our investigations are still on-going, and our activities at the airport continue to build resilience to detect and mitigate further incursions from drones, by deploying a range of tactics.
“We continue to urge the public, passengers and the wider community around Gatwick to be vigilant and support us by contacting us immediately if they believe they have any information that can help us in bringing those responsible to justice.


More at: https://news.sussex.police.uk/news/two-arrested-in-drone-disruption-at-gatwick-343013
 
There was more chaos for holiday travelers at London’s Gatwick Airport, where flights were briefly suspended again on Friday because of a "suspected drone sighting."
At 5:47 p.m. local time (12:47 p.m. ET), Gatwick airport said in a tweet that it was “investigating reports of a drone sighting. As a precaution we have suspended airfield operations.”
But less than an hour later, Gatwick sent an updated tweet saying flights had resumed.
"Airfield movements were suspended while we investigated this as safety remains our main priority," Gatwick said in a tweet from 6:31 p.m. local time (1:31 p.m. ET). "The military measures we have in place at the airport have provided us with reassurance necessary to re-open our airfield."

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/more-gatwick-airport-chaos-drone-190334009.html
 
Superintendent James Collis said “As part of our ongoing investigations into the criminal use of drones which has severely disrupted flights in and out of Gatwick Airport, Sussex Police made two arrests just after 10pm on 21 December.
“Our investigations are still on-going, and our activities at the airport continue to build resilience to detect and mitigate further incursions from drones, by deploying a range of tactics.
“We continue to urge the public, passengers and the wider community around Gatwick to be vigilant and support us by contacting us immediately if they believe they have any information that can help us in bringing those responsible to justice.


More at: https://news.sussex.police.uk/news/two-arrested-in-drone-disruption-at-gatwick-343013
Police have arrested two suspects - a 47-year-old man and 54-year-old woman from Crawley - believed to be the perpetrators of a bizarre incident that brought air traffic at Sussex's Gatwick airport to a grinding halt for 36 hours this week when drones were spotted flying over the airport's runway, according to the BBC.

If found guilty of violating laws prohibiting the piloting of drones within one kilometer of an airport, the couple could face up to 5 years in jail - not to mention the enduring ire of the British people.

According to the Sun, the couple was arrested after a cyclist was spotted "frantically" packing a drone into a bag near the airport.
Sussex Police said today: "A 47-year-old man and a 54-year-old woman, both from Crawley, were arrested in the town on suspicion of disrupting services of civil aviation aerodrome to endanger or likely to endanger safety of operations or persons."
"They remained in custody at 11am on Saturday."
A witness who said he spotted one of the suspects described the scene to the Sun:
It comes as driver Paul Motts, 52, told The Sun how he spotted the man "in this 30s and in hi-vis clothing" in a country lane four miles from the runway on Thursday night.
The EDF Energy manager said: "I was delivering a parcel and drove past a suspicious man in fluorescent cycling gear crouching over a large drone which was all lit up."
"It was a big thing with lights on its arms and roughly 4ft across."
"He had a smaller drone, about 2ft across, next to him."
"He was leaning over and doing something to it. He was totally focused and did not look up when I drove past."
"It looked like he was packing the drones away. Two minutes later we turned around and came across him cycling away."
"I expect he wanted to disassemble the drone as quickly as possible and get away as fast as he could."
"It was pretty weird considering what had happened at the airport during the day."
Police said the arrests were made following raids "in the Gatwick area". Though they added that the investigation into the incident is ongoing.


To bring about an end to the chaos, the Army employed "drone killer" technology used in the fight against ISIS to try and disable the drones, though it's unclear how effective the technology was (particularly after the drone made at least one return appearance after flights resumed on Friday). The technology uses radio-jamming frequencies to crash the drones. The Israeli-made tech has been used in the fight against ISIS in Mosul last year.
Ruling out the possibility that the drone activity was some kind of accident, a spokesman for Gatwick said the flight patterns suggest the drone flights were a deliberate attempt to paralyze traffic on the busy holiday weekend. At one point, the drone was flown close to Gatwick’s control tower and even flashed its lights at police officers in what the Sun described as a deliberate taunt.
Now that the incident is (hopefully) resolved, here's a timeline of events that showcases just how disruptive the incident was. Given the relatively high ROI in terms of disruption compared with the cost and difficulty in pulling this off, airports around the world are on high alert for copy cat attacks that could prove even more disruptive.
2018.12.22drone.JPG



More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018...spects-bizarre-gatwick-airport-drone-shutdown
 
Federal air marshals are being moved to the back of the plane -- some of them, at least.
The undercover agents who are posted randomly to protect U.S. airliners are -- for the first time -- going to be assigned regularly to seats toward the back, sources briefed on the Transportation Security Administration’s plans told ABC News.
Until now, the marshals were always assigned seats toward the front of the planes.
The new deployments are scheduled to go into effect Dec. 28.

Officials at the TSA, which controls the Federal Air Marshal Service, declined to discuss specifics, citing policies that require operational details to be kept secret. They insisted that it’s important for the agency to sometimes change its routine to keep pace with new and emerging threats.

And they believe that positioning marshals throughout the cabin could allow agents to keep a closer eye on passengers who might pose a risk -- before any type of attack could begin.


By moving the undercover agents back into the entire passenger cabin, some believe the marshals’ ability to their jobs could be compromised.
“The TSA wants to change the way operations are carried out, and the men and women of the Federal Air Marshal Service do not support these changes,” Brian Borek, representative of the air marshals to the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association. “The TSA, riddled with their own organizational issues, should allow the air marshals to do what they have continued to do best -- fly operationally sound missions to protect the integrity of the aircraft, its crew, and passengers in the manner that they have been training and perfecting for the last 17 years.”
When asked by ABC News about the specific changes, Borek, citing secrecy requirements, said he could not provide details.
Borek added: “Changing deployment methodologies and the manner in which we conduct business is absolutely unnecessary and does not pass the common-sense test -- especially during the busiest travel season of the year."


"The men and women who perform these vital worldwide national security missions do not support and vehemently disagree with the proposed changes,” he said.
Sara Nelson, international president of the Association of Flight Attendants, said TSA's leadership should consider concerns voiced by the air marshals.
"Air marshals are an integral part of aviation security and we hold our partnership in the highest regard,” Nelson told ABC News. “We agree wholeheartedly with TSA that there should be a constant review and appropriate response to emerging threats, with the inclusion of any concerns expressed by our air marshals.
"They are our tactical experts and their voices should be included in determining the most effective security measures," she added.
Observers who monitor TSA and its parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security, told ABC News that frontline officers are worried that senior officials have not considered the consequences of moving marshals away from the front of aircraft.
They fear marshals assigned to the rear of planes could wind up blocked in crowded rows or have trouble getting out of seats and up narrow aisles in emergencies. They say marshals need to be free to race toward the cockpit in the event of an attempted breach.

Also, they take issue with the way the changes were planned and announced, without input from the marshals themselves.

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/exclusive...perations-212505199--abc-news-topstories.html
 
British police on Sunday released without charge two people arrested in an inquiry into the illegal use of drones at London's Gatwick Airport that crippled operations for three days last week.

"Both people have fully co-operated with our inquiries, and I am satisfied that they are no longer suspects in the drone incidents at Gatwick," Detective Chief Superintendent Jason Tingley said on Sunday.
The two were held after information was passed to the police by a member of the public, Tingley told Sky News. He said he was confident the arrests were justified.
He said authorities were continuing to actively follow lines of investigation to catch those responsible for the most disruptive incursions from unmanned aerial vehicles seen at any major airport.
A damaged drone had been recovered a close to the perimeter of the airport, he said, and it was being forensically examined, for example for clues about whether it was controlled remotely from afar or by somebody in the vicinity.
No group has claimed responsibility for the disruption.
"We have kept an open mind throughout and that is still the case with regards to the motivation behind these incidents," he said.

The airport said on Sunday it was offering a reward of 50,000 pounds ($63,275) for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/uk-police-release-two-people-arrested-gatwick-drone-114006356.html
 
Meanwhile, the army and police have released few details about the techniques they used to resolve the drone issue. But after photographs of three unidentified devices spotted on the airport's roof surfaced in the media...
2018.12.23dronestwo.JPG

2018.12.23dronesthree.JPG

...some experts are beginning to develop theories about what the devices are and how they were used.
Many have suggested that the Israeli-developed "Drone Dome" was used to jam communications and down the drone, according to the BBC.
It is believed that the Israeli-developed Drone Dome system, which can jam communications between the drone and its operator, was used.
However, experts have said it does not enable the person responsible to be tracked down and captured.
John Murray, professor of robotics and autonomous systems at the University of Hull, said it could only "take the drone out of the sky".
The Telegraph published a guide to three systems its experts believe may have been used (text courtesy of the Telegraph):
1. Drone detection device
Gatwick deployed Metis Aerospace’s Skyperion, counter drone system, that detects drones and tracks their flight. The device can also track the drone’s operator, in theory allowing authorities to trace the drone pilot.
The company is based in Lincoln and arrived on site at Gatwick on Thursday evening. The equipment takes minutes to set up and can track an in-flight drone from about three miles away in seconds.
Two Skyperion detectors were deployed at Gatwick giving coverage across the entire airport. Detection equipment attempts to locate a controller by "triangulating" the signals between the controller and the drone to pinpoint where they are geographically.
The Skyperion consists of six panels with round, white faces giving 360 degree detection for radio frequencies used by the operators to direct and control the drones. The Skyperion was successfully tested at London Southend airport in May.
2. Drone tracker
Working in tandem with the Metis Aerospace Skyperion is the ‘military grade’ Falcon Shield counter-drone system developed by Leonardo, one of the key players in the aerospace, defence and security industry.
The Falcon Shield system can "reliably find, fix, track, identify and defeat the security threat posed by low, slow and small drones," according to its manufacturer.
The Falcon Shield consists of two cameras, one for infra-red night-time detection and the other, smaller lens for regular daytime observation. The third lens - the square lens on the right - is a laser range finder.
Falcon Shield claims to be able to take control of a rogue drone and land it safely if needs be.
3. Drone jamming device
Obscured by police officers, the third piece of kit seen on the Gatwick airport roof is possibly a jamming device, used to disrupt the signal between the ground operator and the drone. A well-placed source said a jamming device was deployed at Gatwick and which was supplied by the British military. The source suggested the drone jammer was to be used as backup and as a last resort. Authorities had placed Army and police snipers around the perimeter of the airport and had hoped to shoot the drone down or else trace it back to its operator - rather than jam the signal. "We want to capture the drone not destroy it," said the source.
Jamming technology disrupts the radio frequencies being used by the controller to direct the drone. Experts describe it as like using a huge blast of targeted noise to block the signals between the controller and the drone.
The jamming device resembles a gun developed by the US military nicknamed the "dronekiller" that can also jam signals and knock drones out of the sky.
2018.12.23dronekillertwo.jpg


More at: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-23/military-tech-used-defeat-gatwick-drone
 
And with that, Ms. Munoz, having succumbed to her emotions due to the sand in her vagina, has demonstrated to the world why she is unfit to be CEO of the local public pay-toilet in Pyongyang, much less a bodega up on 124th street in Manhattan, and let us not even speak of United.

Bringing personal matters into business decisions is FAIL-plex.

Happy FAIL^FAIL, Ms. Moon-yohz.
 
British police on Sunday released without charge two people arrested in an inquiry into the illegal use of drones at London's Gatwick Airport that crippled operations for three days last week.

"Both people have fully co-operated with our inquiries, and I am satisfied that they are no longer suspects in the drone incidents at Gatwick," Detective Chief Superintendent Jason Tingley said on Sunday.
The two were held after information was passed to the police by a member of the public, Tingley told Sky News. He said he was confident the arrests were justified.
He said authorities were continuing to actively follow lines of investigation to catch those responsible for the most disruptive incursions from unmanned aerial vehicles seen at any major airport.
A damaged drone had been recovered a close to the perimeter of the airport, he said, and it was being forensically examined, for example for clues about whether it was controlled remotely from afar or by somebody in the vicinity.
No group has claimed responsibility for the disruption.
"We have kept an open mind throughout and that is still the case with regards to the motivation behind these incidents," he said.

The airport said on Sunday it was offering a reward of 50,000 pounds ($63,275) for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible.

More at: https://news.yahoo.com/uk-police-release-two-people-arrested-gatwick-drone-114006356.html



ALLAHU AKBAR!
 
This fucking sucks...got called back to work early and here I am sitting in BOS waiting on [MENTION=6186]Danke[/MENTION] to take me to IAH.

Fuck this...its' Christmas morning, I should be home in bed watching the snow fall...not sitting in ever fucking airport.

And why are all these people here, with kids?

What the actual fuck...
 
This fucking sucks...got called back to work early and here I am sitting in BOS waiting on [MENTION=6186]Danke[/MENTION] to take me to IAH.

Fuck this...its' Christmas morning, I should be home in bed watching the snow fall...not sitting in ever fucking airport.

And why are all these people here, with kids?

What the actual fuck...

Aw, that sucks.

I'm pretty sure you're more important than me but I don't answer the phone when work calls. If it's really important, they can text me and tell me exactly what they want from me and even then, I pretend I didn't see the texts most of the time, lol.
 
Aw, that sucks.

I'm pretty sure you're more important than me but I don't answer the phone when work calls. If it's really important, they can text me and tell me exactly what they want from me and even then, I pretend I didn't see the texts most of the time, lol.

Yah, I should have done that.

Wouldn't have made any difference though in the long run.

I was scheduled to fly this afternoon...but shit, didn't want leave at oh dark thirty for a butt crack of dawn flight.
 
Back
Top