Posted on 05/02/2013 2:54:19 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The UK Airprox Board – which investigates near misses in the skies – heard the incident had taken place at around 3500ft.
...
The report concluded: “Members were of the opinion that, in the absence of a primary radar return, it was unlikely that the untraced ac was a fixed-wing or rotary-wing ac or man-carrying balloon.
“It was considered that a meteorological balloon would be radar significant and unlikely to be released in the area of the Airprox.
“A glider could not be discounted but it was felt unlikely that one would be operating in that area, both due to the constrained airspace and the lack of thermal activity due to the low temperature.
“Similarly, The Board considered that a hang-glider or para-motor would be radar significant and that conditions precluded them, as they did para-gliders or parascenders. Members were unable to reach a conclusion as to a likely candidate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at local.stv.tv ...
Only a matter of time. Unfortunately.
3500 feet.
It looks like the Airbus was on approach.
“Was the Drone/UAV Hovering in the JFK Landing Approach Kill Zone (LAKZ) a Failed Terrorist Attack?”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3014942/posts
There was NO radar return for the multi-copter that missed the Alitalia airliner by 200 feet five miles out on the runway 31R landing approach at about 1,500 to 1700 feet altitude.
EET
(Ewen the Extra-Terrestrial)
CC
In the US it is “illegal” to fly a drone above 400 feet and/or out of line of sight. If you are not a law-abiding citizen you can fly it 20 to 30 miles away and to the limit of the flight envelop of the aircraft.
“Video piloting (first-person view)”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-controlled_aircraft
First-person view (FPV) flight is a type of remote-control flying that has grown in popularity in recent years. It involves mounting a small video camera and television transmitter on an RC aircraft and flying by means of a live video down-link, commonly displayed on video goggles or a portable LCD screen. When flying FPV, the pilot sees from the aircraft’s perspective, and does not even have to look at the model. As a result, FPV aircraft can be flown well beyond visual range, limited only by the range of the remote control and video transmitter. Video transmitters typically operate at a power level between 200 mW and 1500 mW. The most common frequencies used for video transmission are 900 MHz, 1.2 GHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz.[5] Specialized long-range UHF control systems operating at 433 MHz (for amateur radio licensees only) or 869 MHz[5] are commonly used to achieve greater control range, while the use of directional, high-gain antennas increases video range. Sophisticated setups are capable of achieving a range of 20–30 miles or more.[6]
A basic FPV system consists of a camera, video transmitter, video receiver, and a display. More advanced setups commonly add in specialized hardware, including on-screen displays with GPS navigation and flight data, stabilization systems, and autopilot devices with “return to home” capability—allowing the aircraft to fly back to its starting point on its own in the event of signal loss. On-board cameras can be equipped with a pan and tilt mount, which when coupled with video goggles and “head tracking” devices creates a truly immersive, first-person experience, as if the pilot was actually sitting in the cockpit of the RC aircraft.[5]
Both helicopters and fixed-wing RC aircraft are used for FPV flight. The most commonly chosen airframes for FPV planes are larger models with sufficient payload space for the video equipment and large wings capable of supporting the extra weight. Pusher-propeller planes are preferred so that the propeller is not in view of the camera. “Flying wing” designs are also popular for FPV, as they provide the best combination of large wing surface area, speed, maneuverability, and gliding ability. FPV aircraft are frequently used for aerial photography and videography, and many videos of FPV flights can be found on popular video sites such as YouTube and Vimeo.
In the United States, the Academy of Model Aeronautics’ own safety code forbids the pilot of the model from observing its flight solely with onboard video, requiring the modeler to strictly use their own natural vision, only augmented by corrective eyewear when prescribed, throughout the flight to observe and safely control the model.[7]
ping...
“The board head the object passed directly beneath the plane before either of the crew had time to take avoiding action or had ‘really registered it’ although they were both agreed that it appeared blue and yellow or silver in colour with a small frontal area but that it was ‘bigger than a balloon’.”
The “UFO” that was 300 feet from the A320 approaching Glasgow at 3,500 feet was Blue and yellow or silver? I did a search on “blue yellow model copter” and sorted to the larger ones that would be capable of attaining 3,500 feet with the hardware for first-person view (FPV) video piloting installed as described here:
“Video piloting (first-person view)”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio-controlled_aircraft
“First-person view (FPV) flight is a type of remote-control flying that has grown in popularity in recent years. It involves mounting a small video camera and television transmitter on an RC aircraft and flying by means of a live video down-link, commonly displayed on video goggles or a portable LCD screen. When flying FPV, the pilot sees from the aircraft’s perspective, and does not even have to look at the model. As a result, FPV aircraft can be flown well beyond visual range, limited only by the range of the remote control and video transmitter. Video transmitters typically operate at a power level between 200 mW and 1500 mW. The most common frequencies used for video transmission are 900 MHz, 1.2 GHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.8 GHz.[5] Specialized long-range UHF control systems operating at 433 MHz (for amateur radio licensees only) or 869 MHz[5] are commonly used to achieve greater control range, while the use of directional, high-gain antennas increases video range. Sophisticated setups are capable of achieving a range of 20–30 miles or more.”
I quickly came up with a large, newly available, high-performance, bright BLUE and YELLOW copter with a 6.5 foot diameter SILVER rotor, the “GOBLIN 770” by “44GHz”:
“Goblin 770 Initial Color Scheme”
http://www.44ghz.com/goblin-770-initial-color-scheme/
At the link just below are videos of the Goblin 770 doing stupefying aerial acrobatics as well as achieving very high velocity (one video is of the Blue and Yellow model):
“Goblin 770 and Kyle Stacey” (try and fail to destroy the copter at high speed, high gravity)
http://www.44ghz.com/goblin-770-and-kyle-stacey/
“If you can’t get enough Goblin 770 action, check out this video of the new 800-sized electric bird being flown by SAB Heli Division Team Pilot, Kyle Stacey. This piece of mechanical artwork sells for just shy of $1,200 US in kit form (the helicopter, not Kyle). ... :)”
If not this one, a mini-copter in this class would be my best guess for the UFO involved in the Glasgow near miss.
Doesn't look anything like a haggis..
Here is a high quality amateur YouTube video of a cargo ship under way shot by a quadcopter under FPV (first-person view) control by a merchant seaman.
The quadcopter is highly maneuverable even in blustery over-water wind conditions and appears to easily achieve altitudes in excess of 3,500 feet, the Glasgow UFO intercept altitude.
“Cruddcopter FPV - Seaman Style (GoPro 3 Black) HD”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-xvmOEmbyco
The seaman is pictured in the video with a FPV headset that looks like this “FatShark” headset system:
Totally unrelated other than the camera which is amazing, this one is jumping off a cliff along with a dog, which is chasing a ball into the ocean on Bermuda.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EREQEy2tOxo
Here is a more detailed report of the Glasgow “UFO” encounter with transcript from (you quessed it) the Daily Mail!
“This is a transcript of what the A320 pilot told the control tower.”
A320: ‘Glasgow Approach [A320 C/S]’
Air Traffic Control: ‘[A320 C/S] pass your message’
A320: ‘Er yeah we just had something pass underneath us quite close and nothing on TCAS have you got anything on in our area’
Control: ‘Er negative er we’ve got nothing on er radar and we’re n-not talking to any traffic either’
A320: ‘Er not quite sure what it was but it definitely er quite large and it’s blue and yellow’
Control: ‘OK that’s understood er do you have a an estimate for the height’
A320: ‘Maybe er yeah we were probably about erm four hundred to five hundred feet above it so it’s probably about three and a half thousand feet.
‘…we seemed to only miss it by a couple of hundred feet it went directly beneath us … wherever we were when we called it in it was within about ten seconds
‘… couldn’t tell what direction it was going but it went right underneath us”’
Control: ‘do you suspect it might have been a glider or something like that’
A320: ‘well maybe a microlight … it just looked too big for a balloon.”
Massive BUMP for later...
And a hearty thank-you, Carp...
Looks like a passenger van
Well said.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.