| Airprox # |
Score |
Rating |
Details |
Board Comment |
| 2019038 |
-50 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone between 6000ft and 9000ft is infinitesimal, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 1,640ft (500m) hard height limit and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. Furthermore, the technical limitations of battery energy density / mass would mean that any drone that was able to reach these heights would have a very short loiter time – less than two minutes at 6000ft. No consumer drone could reach 9000ft in real world conditions. The description is of something unlike a multirotor drone. |
Weather: Sunny 10km/h SSE |
| 2019039 |
-60 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone above 1,640ft is small, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 1,640ft (500m) hard height limit and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. The description partially matches a multirotor drone. The location was geo-fenced, which means that at least 80% of drones could not be operated in that area/ at that altitude. |
The location is within a Geozone which prevents a drone from flying ahove 150m (492ft). Weather: Sunny 8km/h ESE. |
| 2019040 |
-95 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from a person other than flight crew or drone operator. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone above 1,640ft is small, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 1,640ft (500m) hard height limit and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. The wind strength (between 15 and 25mph at ground level) would make drone operations difficult, and would significantly reduce the range and heights achievable.The location was geo-fenced, which means that at least 80% of drones could not be operated in that area/ at that altitude. |
The location is within a Geozone which prevents a drone from flying above 150m (492ft). Weather: Partly Sunny 28km/h SW |
| 2019041 |
-80 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone between 6000ft and 9000ft is infinitesimal, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 1,640ft (500m) hard height limit and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. Furthermore, the technical limitations of battery energy density / mass would mean that any drone that was able to reach these heights would have a very short loiter time – less than two minutes at 6000ft. No consumer drone could reach 9000ft in real world conditions. The description partially matches a multirotor drone. The location was geo-fenced, which means that at least 80% of drones could not be operated in that area/ at that altitude. |
The location is within a Geozone which prevents a drone from flying (at all). Weather: 5km/h SW |
| 2019042 |
-40 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone between 6000ft and 9000ft is infinitesimal, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 1,640ft (500m) hard height limit and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. Furthermore, the technical limitations of battery energy density / mass would mean that any drone that was able to reach these heights would have a very short loiter time – less than two minutes at 6000ft. No consumer drone could reach 9000ft in real world conditions. The description partially matches a multirotor drone. |
Weather: Clear 3km/h E |
| 2019043 |
-85 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone above 400ft is reduced, as DJI products (75% market share*) feature a 400ft (121m) height limit warning and Yuneec products (second largest market share with 5%*) feature a hard 400ft (121m) height limit. (Most of the drones in the remaining 20% are toys which would be incapable of reaching this height or racing drones which are flown within a few feet of the ground.) It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit.The weather conditions (heavy rain) were unsuitable for drone operations.The wind strength (between 15 and 25mph at ground level) would make drone operations difficult, and would significantly reduce the range and heights achievable.The location was geo-fenced, which means that at least 80% of drones could not be operated in that area/ at that altitude. |
This location is within a Geozone which prevents a drone from flying (at all). Weather: Scattered Shower 25km/h W. |
| 2019046 |
-70 |
The Board considered it unlikely that the object observed was a drone. |
This is an eyewitness report from the aircraft flight crew only. There is no corroborating evidence. The location (more than five miles offshore) makes encountering a drone totally improbable.No photographic evidence. The likelihood of encountering a drone between 9000ft and 12000ft is effectively zero. These heights would be impossible for consumer drones due to the technical limitations of battery energy density / mass. A custom-built drone could possibly achieve this level but they account for less than 3% of the fleet*. If possible at all, loiter time at this altitude could only be a few seconds. It would also require the drone pilot to be willing to fly the drone illegally above the 400ft legal height limit. The description is of something unlike a multirotor drone. |
This location is 20km from the nearest land. Weather: Quite cool 13km/h W.
See full report |
