February 2020
| Total | Highly Unlikely | Unlikely | Likely | Highly Likely |
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Airprox # | Score | Rating | Details | ARC Comment |
| 2020004 | -120 | ARC considered it highly 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 wind strength (between 25 and 40km/h at ground level) would make drone operations difficult, and would significantly reduce the range and heights achievable.The wind strength (above 72kmh/h at reported level) would make drone operations impossible. | The report was made at 12:14, so the event obviously happened shortly before that (especially when the need to wait for a break in transmissions is factored in). At this time the B787 G-ZBKK was heading East. The Captain (left Seat) would have had traffic (A320 G-EUUK) heading NW to join the approach into Heathrow in view in his 10 – 11o’clock, below (descending through 4000feet), at a range of approximately 9nm. Aftercast indicates that there was a thin layer of cloud at 3200 feet.
The wind at the reported level was 74km/h which would make it impossible for a drone to operate. Particularly a large black drone, which are used for photography and usually have short battery life. Under the UKAB’s published methodology this should be classified as an Unknown Object. |
| 2020007 | -40 | ARC 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 3,000ft is very 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. 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 six minutes at 4000ft. The object encountered is described as a “Drone” but with no further details. | During the turn B737 G-DTRW (the reporting aircraft) had EV97 microlight G-CCEJ heading North from Coventry at 7nm range to the East of them. This would have first appeared to be on the Port side of the reporting a/c. The EV97 was coloured dark blue and silver. At a distance of 7nm it would have appeared to be about the size of a drone at 50 – 100m range.
Under the UKAB’s published methodology this should be classified as an Unknown Object. The Captain did not see the object. |