UK Airprox Board UK Airprox Board
  • Consolidated Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Report Sheet for UKAB Meeting on 20th June 2018

    Download below sheet as PDF

     

    Total Risk A Risk B Risk C Risk D Risk E
    13 3 7 3 0 0

     

    Airprox

    Number

    Date

    Time (UTC)

    Aircraft

    (Operator)

    Object

    Location

    Description

    Altitude

    Airspace

    (Class)

    Pilot/Controller Report

    Reported Separation

    Reported Risk

    Cause/Risk Statement

    ICAO

    Risk

    2018075

    29 Apr 18

    1755

    Q400

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5316N 00241W

    Kingsley

    5000ft

    Manchester TMA

    (A)

    The Q400 pilot reports that the aircraft was level at 5000ft, inbound to Manchester, when a drone flew over the top in the opposite direction, about 200ft above.  He immediately reported it to ATC.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    Cause: The drone was being flown beyond practical VLOS limits such that it was endangering other aircraft at that altitude and position. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the Q400.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018076

    5 May 18

    1245

    B757

    (Civ Comm)

    Unknown Object

    5101N 00028W

    Brooklands

    4800ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The B757 pilot reports operating under a high workload, preparing for an approach at Gatwick in busy airspace, when the First Officer said “what’s that?”.  The Captain (PF) looked out and saw a fairly large, irregular shaped, dark black object pass down the left side at the same level, within 200ft of the aircraft, apparently heading in an easterly direction. No avoiding action was needed but the incident was reported to Gatwick Director.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/100m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    Cause: The Board could not conclude that the object was a drone and therefore, being an unknown object, the Board agreed that the incident was best described as a conflict in Class A.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018078

    9 May 18

    1635

    DHC8

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5226N 00143W

    1.5nm SE EGBB

    1800ft

    Birmingham CTR

    (D)

    The DHC8 pilot reports conducting a SID from Birmingham, accelerating at 1300ft, when a blue ‘quadcopter’ drone was seen through the Captain’s side window. It passed from left to right within 100ft of the aircraft. The incident was reported on the Tower frequency.

     

    Reported Separation: ‘100ft’

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    Cause: The drone was being flown in the vicinity of an airfield departure lane such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location and altitude. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the DHC8.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018081

    11 May 18

    1818

    A321

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5143N 00032W

    BNN hold

    FL090

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A321 pilot reports that on leaving the BNN holding pattern, the first officer noticed an orange and yellow drone 200ft below and about 100m to the right-hand side of their aircraft. There was a large amount of relative movement with the drone obviously not getting any closer and so avoiding action was not necessary. ATC were informed.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/100m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    Cause: The drone was being flown beyond practical VLOS limits such that it was endangering other aircraft at that altitude and position. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the A321.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

    C
    2018084

    11 Feb 18

    1125

    B767

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5322N 00214W

    1.5nm NE EGCC

    1000ft

    Manchester CTR

    (D)

    The B767 pilot reports on approach to runway 23R at Manchester when a red coloured drone was seen above the aircraft, laterally spaced by about 35m. The incident was reported to the Manchester Tower controller and further details were passed to the ground controller on taxy-in.

     

    Reported Separation: 150ft V/35m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    Cause: The drone was being flown in the vicinity of an airfield approach path such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location and altitude. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B767.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018086

    16 May 18

    1702

    Liberty XL2

    (Civ Pte)

    Drone

    5120N 00004E

    1.2nm NE Biggin Hill

    1000ft

    Biggin Hill ATZ

    (G)

    The Liberty XL2 pilot reports joining runway 03 at Biggin Hill via left base when he saw a small yellow and black drone below him on the right side.

     

    Reported Separation: 75ft V/50m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    Cause: The drone was being flown in the vicinity of an airfield approach path such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location and altitude. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the Liberty XL2.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018089

    15 May 18

    1445

     

    B787

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5127N 00025W

    E LHR

    800ft

     

    London CTR

    (D)

    The B787 pilot reports that on passing 800ft in the climb-out from Heathrow RW09R, a black object about 1-2ft wide, believed to be ‘copter’ shaped, passed 100ft down the left-hand-side of the aircraft.  ATC were informed.

     

    Reported Separation: 100ft V/100ft H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    Cause: The drone was being flown in the vicinity of an airfield departure lane such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location and altitude. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the B787.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018095

    13 May 18

    1115

    A321

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5138N 00012E

    LAM VOR

    FL070

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A321 pilot reports that he was approaching EGLL via LAM, holding at 7000ft, when he noticed an orange drone 500-1000ft below the aircraft.  No avoiding action was required as the drone was seen clearly below the aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: 500-1000ft V/0nm H

    Reported Risk of Collision: None

    Cause: The drone was being flown beyond practical VLOS limits such that it was endangering other aircraft at that altitude and position. However, the Board agreed that in this instance there was no conflict and it was best described as a sighting report.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

    C
    2018097

    21 May 18

    1415

    C130

    (HQ Air Ops)

    Drone

    5125N 00206W

    2.5nm SE Chippenham

    500ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The C130 pilot reports that he was leading a formation of two C130s, in trail, at low-level. The Captain of the lead C130 saw a white circular drone pass the left wing. The aircraft was banked right and the Captain relayed the drone sighting to the following C130, who’s crew did not see it.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/200ft H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    Cause: The drone was being flown within VLOS limits and clear of airfield activity. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as a conflict in Class G.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2018099

    16 May 18

    1520

    Q400

    (CAT)

    Unknown Object

    5126N 00003W

    Sydenham

    2000ft

    London City CTR

    (D)

    The Q400 pilot reports that he was under radar control from Thames Director on the ODLEG 1J arrival into LCY.  Approximately 2 miles east of TODBI a large drone was spotted approximately 50ft below the aircraft and to the left.  The drone was very clear so lateral separation was probably 10-15ft. ATC were informed immediately.  The drone did not look like a conventional 'quad' drone, it was large, with a white dome and looked as though it had something dangling below.  The crew described it as Jellyfish like in shape.

     

    Reported Separation: 50ft V/10-15ft H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    Cause: The Board could not conclude that the object was a drone and therefore, being an unknown object, the Board agreed that the incident was best described as a conflict in Class D.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

    A
    2018100

    14 May 18

    1030

    PC12

    (Civ Comm)

    Drone

    5138N 00032W

    Maple Cross VRP

    1400ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The PC12 pilot reports approaching the Maple Cross VRP when he saw a square drone ahead, about 2sec before overflying it

     

    Reported Separation: 30ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    Cause: The drone was being flown within VLOS limits and clear of airfield activity. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as a conflict in Class G.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

    A
    2018107

    6 May 18

    1245

    A320

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5135N 00011W

    12nm NE Heathrow

    6000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A320 pilot reports that on levelling at 6000ft on a radar heading of 350°, a white drone passed very close by, on the right-hand-side.  It was estimated to be within the span of the right-hand wing and it passed above the wing and clear.  No avoiding action was taken.

     

    Reported Separation: 20ftV/10m

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

     

    The TCC Controller reports that the A320 pilot reported a white drone at 6000ft.  He acknowledged and disseminated the information amongst the rest of the North Bank team and told the next aircraft departing.  That pilot also saw the drone and elected to remain at 5000ft until clear, instead of climbing to 6000ft.

    Cause: The drone was being flown beyond practical VLOS limits such that it was endangering other aircraft at that altitude and position. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the A320.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

    A
    2018109

    20 May 18

    1725

    A319

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5135N 00017W

    9nm NE Heathrow

    6000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A319 pilot reports that on passing 6000ft a white drone was spotted less than half a mile away and within 500ft of the aircraft.  The drone was also seen by the next departing aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: 300ftV/<0.5nm

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    Cause: The drone was being flown beyond practical VLOS limits such that it was endangering other aircraft at that altitude and position. The Board agreed that the incident was therefore best described as the drone was flown into conflict with the A319.

     

    Risk: The Board considered that the pilot’s overall account of the incident portrayed a situation where although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

    C