This one sounds like it REALLY was close …
1 Like
Soooo, Aircraft flying in excess of 250mph (A321 can fly upto 518mph) entering a holding pattern so pilot would be looking out the front of the aircraft but still manages to see and identify an object passing 5ft over their wing at a speed of over 250mph (over 366 feet per second) as a drone. Going to call bull 
on this. Doubly so as it’s in the Daily Fail. 
7 Likes
At 9,600ft???
1 Like
And? It’s certainly possible.
1 Like
Got to call bulls**t. At 250mph, the pilot would have to have 60/60 vision to positively identify it as a drone. I’ve just looked on the old internet and there’s few drones that could physically reach 9600 ft high. At least not any the ordinary member on here could afford. Maximum height of hobbyist drones means all of them would be incapable of flying this high. I now wondering if the pilot has seen some sort of balloon ? ( but yep, what else would the bloody Daily Mail call it these days ?)
Anyway, most ( if not all ) passenger aircraft pilots are lucky if they can see the wingtips from the cockpit, yet this one claims he saw it pass over the wing ? At the speeds involved he’d have snapped his neck as he looked back 
2 Likes
The good old Mavic Pro had managed way higher!
Check YouTube.
1 Like
Having had several “interactions” with the AirProx Board both as an RAF pilot and a flying instructor all I can say is they are not generally renowned for over reacting in their reports!
I think what is certain is that at that kind of closing speed, and that close, it’s humanly impossible to distinguish between a drone. an albatross or an ostrich.
1 Like
Pretty much all DJI drones can, not sure on the Avata though 
just wondering 
if a drone was flown close to an aircraft… once the plane had passed would the turbulence not send it crashing down to earth?
if it were a DJI one (most common or probably likely) then it would likely fail safe (I forget the warning I’ve seen) but I hand catch my avata (and FPV) and flip it upside down and it stops the props…
so …
not a lot of worry for the plane behind then as it’s probably on a downward path to earth?
think the other mini drones too stop of the props if they go upside down.
just wondering why planes don’t have dash cams fitted? seriously say two or three dash cams would solve all these guesses… was it or wasn’t it a drone.
camera technology is so cheap now… sure it may not be able or desirable to transmit it to the black box recorders but for the purposes of these sort of was it or wasn’t it investigations… I’m surprised no one seems to have them added to the cockpit
sure seeing something at 250mph or 500mph is challenging but at least maybe the camera may capture a frame or two… same as the eye really
1 Like
I did not think an Ostrich could fly that high ?
The identical probability to the pilot identifying a drone, then.
Maybe it was a UFO and not a drone, but drones are a topic on everyone’s agenda.
Yes it’s possible for any DJI or similar largish drone to hit that height if it’s modded (not that you’d want or need to), I’ve personally seen 7800ft ASL and it’s a stunning view. It’s been about a month since the last “close call” report so it’s due for a refresh in scare mongering.
Doubt it was a drone but it’s entirely possible. The drone would of totally lost control if it really was 5ft from the plane due to the turbulence around the plane so the apparent drone pilot would of lost the drone for sure. Hope he was screen recording 
1 Like
Agreed - pics or it didn’t happen !
3 Likes
Just checked historical weather data for that date, location, time and height … 45-60mph gusts. Heavy rain in the area as well.
Definitely did not happen.
Just like the “incident” in America a couple of days ago where the pilot reported a drone hit their plane, when in reality it was confirmed it was a fucking bird.
Happens all the time, pilots mis-reporting birds in the area as drones. The media picks up on it without investigating just to get people to read the lies.
3 Likes
that’s actually a good point
did the incident not occur on 3rd January at 16:30
but sunset was at 16:03… (around London)
must have had good eyesight… I think maybe this one needs another looking at and maybe a retraction by the newspaper (ain’t never going to happen one it’s in print)
Sunset is later at that altitude.
1 Like
Sunset is only a little later at that height, but once it’s passed civil twilight you won’t see much and won’t see shit passed nautical twilight. The lighting in the sky around that time would of been tricky to see something fly by at 250mph. Another notch in the total bullshit report.