UK Airprox Board UK Airprox Board
  • Assessment Summary Sheet for UKAB Meeting on Wednesday 19th June 2019

    Contributory factor assessment for each Airprox can be downloaded here


    Total A B C D E
    19 2
    5 8 1 3

     

    Airprox Aircraft 1 (Type) Aircraft 2 (Type) Airspace (Class)

    ICAO

    Risk

    2019028 P68 (Civ FW) BE36 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    Recommendation: The P68 operating company consider the incorporation of a TAS.
    2019032 Parachutists (Civ Para) Tiger Moth (Civ FW) London FIR (G) D
    2019034 A320 (CAT) P68 (Civ Comm) Luton CTR (D) C
    2019035 EC135 (HEMS) Ikarus C42 (Civ FW) Barton ATZ (G) B
    2019036 Falcon 2000 (Civ FW) Mooney M20 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019037 PA28 (Civ FW) C152 (Civ FW) Blackbushe ATZ (G) C
    2019044 PA34 (Civ FW) T67M (Civ FW) London FIR (G) E
    2019045 AW109 (HQ Air Ops) Light Aircraft (Unknown) London FIR (G) B
    2019047 Wildcat (RN) AW169 (HEMS) London FIR (G) C
    2019049 Tutor (HQ Air Trg) C150 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) E
    2019051 A319(A) (CAT) A319(B) (CAT) Belfast TMA (D) C
    2019053 Typhoon (HQ Air Ops)
    Tutor (HQ Air Trg) London FIR (G)
    A
    2019055 C152(A) (Civ FW) C152(B) (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019056 AW109 (Civ Helo) C152 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019058 ASH25 Glider (Civ Gld) AA5 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) A
    2019059 PA28(A) (Civ FW) PA28(B) (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019060 Prefect (HQ Air Trg) ASH25 (Civ Gld) London FIR (G) C
    2019061 Ventus Glider (Civ Gld) Cabri G2 (Civ Helo) London FIR (G) B
    2019062 Saab 340 (CAT) S92 (Civ Helo) Scottish FIR (G) E

  • Consolidated Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Report Sheet for UKAB Meeting on 19 Jun 2019

    Contributory factor assessment for each Airprox can be downloaded here

     

    Total Risk A Risk B Risk C Risk D Risk E
    12 4 1 7 0 0

     

    Airprox

    Number   

    Date

    Time (UTC)                       

    Aircraft

    (Operator)  

    Object  

    Location

    Description

    Altitude           

    Airspace

    (Class)                     

    Pilot/Controller Report

    Contributory Factors (CF)/Risk

    (see table at link)                 

    ICAO

    Risk

    2019082

    14 Apr 19

    1215

    Ventus

    (Civ Gld)

    Drone

    5239N 00218W

    2nm NW Cosford

    3800ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The Ventus pilot reports that the weather was good, with clear visibility.  The incident occurred about 1nm NW of junction 3 of the M54.  He noticed a small object ahead and slightly right of centre, it appeared to be hovering. As he closed in, he suddenly realised it was a large black drone directly in front of him at the same altitude.  His immediate reaction was to turn to port.  He glanced right to observe it pass the starboard wingtip.  He immediately transmitted on the Cosford frequency to warn others of its presence. After the incident he returned to Cosford because he was feeling shaken.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/ NK H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019084

    1 May 19

    1317

    BE76

    (Civ FW)

    Drone

    5123N 00107W

    6nm SW Reading

    2200ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The BE76 pilot reports that whilst in straight and level cruise he saw an object directly ahead at a range of about 200m and slightly below. At first, he thought it was a bird and expected it to veer off as birds usually do when they become aware of an approaching aircraft. However, he observed that the object maintained its course and as he drew closer he realised it was a large quadcopter drone. He distinctly saw the rotors contained within their rotor rings and that the central body was dark and mottled in colour and appeared to be camouflaged. The drone appeared to maintain a steady course and height. He was unable to ascertain its speed. The pilot stated that there was no opportunity to take avoiding action and that the risk of collision was very, very high and that he had been very frightened. He noted that had he been a little lower or the drone a little higher it would have impacted directly on to the nose or windscreen of the aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: 25ft V/ 0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Very High

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019086

    1 May 19

    1555

    PA28

    (Civ FW)

    Drone

    5138N 00036E

    South Woodham Ferrers VRP

    2000ft

    Southend CTA

    (D)

    The PA28 pilot reports that he saw a drone off his starboard wing, his first thought was that it was a bird, but he was able to maintain visual contact with it by looking back over his shoulder through the rear window and he was able to see the profile was that of a 4 rotor drone, there were definitely no wing movements and it was not the profile of a bird. He first reported it as 400m away to ATC, but on reflection thought that it was closer than that, about 100m. His risk assessment was taking into consideration that it was not in conflict with his flight path and no avoiding action was taken.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/ 100m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: None

     

    The Southend Controller reports that the PA28 was on a local flight and was transiting Southend’s CAS to the NE at 2000ft.  when in the vicinity of Woodham Ferrers VRP he reported seeing a drone pass down his left-hand side at a distance of 0.25nm at a similar level.

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019088

    4 May 19

    1055

    B787

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5128N 00013W

    7.5nm E Heathrow

    2500ft

    London CTR

    (D)

    The B787 pilot reports being at 7.5nm final approach for RW27R when a drone was observed on their right at approximately 1.5nm. It was slightly below and moving towards their position, but their flight paths were diverging so no avoiding action was necessary. The drone was medium sized and had multiple rotors.

     

    Reported Separation: 500ft V/1.5nm H

    Reported Risk of Collision: None

     

    The Heathrow Controller reports that when on 7nm final, the B787 pilot reported a drone to the right-hand side.

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    Risk: The Board noted the pilots estimate of range seemed at variance with his being able to identify the drone as having multiple rotors.  They concluded that the pilot had probably overestimated the range. Notwithstanding, they 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
    2019090

    4 May 19

    1715

    A319

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    5052N 00004E

    7nm NW Seaford

    9500ft

     

    Worthing CTA

    (A)

    The A319 pilot reports that he was climbing through FL93 for FL120 when both pilots spotted a drone coming towards them.  There was no time to take avoiding action and it passed down the left-hand side of the aircraft. The drone was purple/black in colour.

     

    Reported Separation: 100ft V/ <1nm H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    The Board members considered that the altitude of the encounter and the pilot’s description was such that they could not definitively determine the nature of the object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 5

     

    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
    2019091

    5 May 19

    1400

    A320

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    5102N 00000W

    8nm SE Crawley

    FL060

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A320 pilot reports that on departure from Gatwick RW08R, whilst in the climb, a totally white object resembling a shoebox sized cube with a round ball on top passed down the left-hand side, slightly above and within 50m of the aircraft. The object appeared to be in level flight.

     

    Reported Separation: 100ft V/50m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: None

    The Board noted that this incident occurred in the vicinity of the Met Office site at Herstmonceux, however, the Met Office confirmed that there were no Met balloons airborne in that area at that time and date. The Board were therefore not able to ascertain the nature of the object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 5

     

    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
    2019093

    4 May 19

    1745

    B777

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5119N 00023W

    Ockham

    6000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The B777 pilot reports descending downwind for RW27L at Heathrow, passing 7000ft, when a drone was sighted momentarily, which passed directly underneath the aircraft, about 1000ft below. The sighting was during a period of high workload for both flight crew and ATC who were responding to a succession of reports of wind shear on finals at the time. Only the FO saw the drone but it was a positive identification, estimated to be of a large size. The incident was reported to ATC.

     

    Reported Separation: 1000ft V/ 0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019094

    7 May 19

    0905

    B787

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5127N 00021W

    Heathrow

    1000ft

    London CTR

    (D)

    The B787 pilot reports that he was on final for RW27L, when he saw a white drone to the right of the aircraft and slightly below.  It was operating in the approach at 2.8 DME between RW27L and RW27R at 1000ft, they did not take avoiding action as it was of no immediate threat to their final approach. Although it wasn’t close enough to hit them, they considered it to be a dangerous place to operate and a gust of wind could have blown it into the path of the aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: Not reported

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within the lateral and vertical limits of an FRZ such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019095

    27 Apr 19

    1325

    A319

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    5100N 00006E

    Uckfield

    5600ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A319 pilot reports approaching the MAY VOR from the south under radar vectors when, during a tum, he clearly saw a grey and red or orange ‘fast object’ flying in the opposite direction, to their left, in straight flight. The visual contact lasted for about 4 or 5 seconds as they were in the tum. He thought that the drone made a tum to his right a few seconds after they saw it.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/100m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    The Board members considered that the altitude of the encounter and the pilot’s description was such that they could not definitively determine the nature of the object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 5

     

    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
    2019098

    28 Apr 19

    1240

    A319

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    5109N 00007E

    12nm E Gatwick

    FL117

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A319 pilot reports that after climbing out from Gatwick the PF noticed a drone a few seconds after breaking cloudCloud tops were 7500ft.  It passed below them from the centre of the aircraft and under the right-hand wing, around 30-50ft below.  It was contrasted against the clouds and appeared dark green in colour with a white light on top and was about 2ft long.  Its speed was hard to determine, it may have been hovering. The PM did not see it.

     

    Reported Separation: 50ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    The Board members considered that the altitude of the encounter and the pilot’s description was such that they could not definitively determine the nature of the object. Although the pilot had reported seeing a white light on top of the object, members wondered if this could have been a reflection from the top surface.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 5

     

    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
    2019103

    14 May 19

    1700

    A320

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5555N 00301W

    ~8nm ESE Edinburgh

    6800ft

    Scottish TMA

    (D)

    The A320 pilot reports under radar vectors for the ILS to RW24. It was a completely clear day with excellent visibility. As the aircraft was descending in a right-hand orbit and on an approximate heading of southwest to west, a black ‘hobby drone’ was seen by the First Officer (PM) passing along the right side of the aircraft. No avoiding action was required and a report was made to the Edinburgh approach radar controller who further reported the event to other aircraft following.

     

    Reported Separation: 200ft V/¼nm H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    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
    2019114 19 May 19  

    A320

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5110N 00003W

    Lingfield

    3000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A320 pilot reports that on departure from Gatwick, in a left turn, the First Officer sighted a small drone fly past the nose and down the left-hand side of the aircraft. The Captain then sighted the drone miss the port wingtip by about 20ft. It was described as approximately a meter in length and black in colour with blue markings. The sighting was reported to ATC.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/20ft H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported

    The drone was being flown above the maximum permitted height of 400ft and within controlled airspace such that it was endangering other aircraft at that location.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

     

    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