UK Airprox Board UK Airprox Board
  • Assessment Summary Sheet for UKAB Meeting on Wednesday 13th November 2019

    Contributory factor assessment for each Airprox can be downloaded here

     

    Total A B C D E
    16 0 5 8 1 2

     

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

    ICAO

    Risk

    2019158 PA28 (Civ FW) JetRanger (Civ Helo) London FIR (G) E
    2019160 EC175 (Civ Comm) R22 (Civ Helo) Aberdeen CTR (D) E
    2019161 C130J (HQ Air Ops) Helicopter (Unknown) London FIR (G) D
    2019162 C560 (Civ FW) Bulldog (Civ FW) Prestwick CTR (D) B
    2019163 PA31 (Civ FW) PA28 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019164 Duo-Discus (Civ Gld) Typhoon pair (HQ Air Ops) Easterton Avoid (G) C
    2019165 Kitfox (Civ FW) DR400 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019169 Paramotors (Civ Gld) CH47 Chinook (HQ JHC) London FIR (G) C
    2019170 Prefect (HQ Air Trg) PA28 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019175 Grob 109 (Civ Gld) Miles Falcon (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019176 Ventus (Civ Gld) C182 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019178 DHC6 (Civ FW) EC135 (Civ Helo) London FIR (G) C
    2019180 MD902 (HEMS) EC120 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019183 PA28 (Civ FW) Spitfire (Civ FW) London FIR (G) B
    2019184 C152 (Civ FW) SR22 (Civ FW) London FIR (G) C
    2019188 Voyager (HQ Air Ops) Typhoon (HQ Air Ops) London UIR (C) C

  • Consolidated Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Report Sheet for UKAB Meeting on 13th November 2019

    Contributory factor assessment for each Airprox can be downloaded here

    [1] Latitude and Longitude are usually only estimates that are based on the reported time of occurrence mapped against any available radar data for the aircraft’s position at that time. Because such reported times may be inaccurate, the associated latitudes and longitudes should therefore not be relied upon as precise locations of the event.

     

    Total Risk A Risk B Risk C Risk D Risk E
    12 7 2 3 0 0

     

    Airprox

    Number  

    Date

    Time (UTC)                                                   

    Aircraft

    (Operator)

    Object

    Location[1]

    Description

    Altitude

    Airspace

    (Class)

    Pilot/Controller Report

    Reported Separation

    Reported Risk

    Comments/Risk Statement

    ICAO

    Risk

    2019247

    12 Jul 19     

    1256

    B757

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5350N 00137W

    1nm SE Leeds/Bradford

    900ft

    LBA CTR

    (D)

    The B757 pilot reports at approximately 1.2nm prior to landing at LBA RW32, a suspected drone was spotted.  It was in the hover, in the 11 o’clock, 100ft below their level.  As their closure rate increased the object dropped rapidly before darting off laterally, passing below and to the port side of the aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: 100ft V

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 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
    2019249

    23 Aug 19

    1701

    A319

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5603N 00304W

    10nm Edinburgh

    3400ft

    Edinburgh CTA

    (D)

    The A319 pilot reports he was on the approach to Edinburgh when he saw a black drone with 4 rotors pass 50 to 100m away.  It passed by rapidly and no action was possible.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/ 50-100m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Very High

     

    The Edinburgh Controller reports he was vectoring a number of aircraft including the A319.  At 1701 the pilot reported that he had seen a drone on his right at 3400ft.  the controller asked how close and was told ‘1 wingspan’.  No further details were passed, and the drone was not seen by any other pilots.

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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
    2019250

    26 Aug 19

    1257

    DA40

    (Civ FW)

    Drone

    5210N 00042W

    OLNEY VRP

    2200ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The DA40 pilot reports in straight and level cruise when he saw a silver and black quadcopter drone ahead and below them. He turned left to avoid and the drone passed under the right wing.

     

    Reported Separation: 300ft V/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 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
    2019251

    26 Aug 19

    1207

    GL6000S

    (Civ Comm)

    Unk Obj

    5149N 00040W

    Luton

    4000ft

    Luton CTA

    (D)

    The GL6000S pilot reports he was inbound to Luton when he saw a drone moving west to east at around 4000ft on 12nm final RW08. The drone was black and appeared to have some sort of light source at the front. The size was difficult to judge but best estimate was 50cm by 50cm. It was estimated to pass within 10ft of the aircraft.  An inspection after landing did not find any evidence of a strike.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/ 10ft H

    Reported Risk of Collision: NR

     

    The Swanwick Controller reports that the GL6000S pilot reported that he had seen a drone at 4000ft and almost hit it. He was 12nm final for RW08 Luton.  The following aircraft did not report seeing it.

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were such that they were unable to determine the nature of the unknown object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors:  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
    2019258

    28 Aug 19

    1839

    DHC-8

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    5125N 00007W

    Croydon

    4400ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The DHC-8 pilot reports that he was following radar vectors when the crew saw a white oval shape which did not look like a bird. The object did not have any lights nor were any propellers noticeable or visible at the height/speed at which the object passed. However, a marking was just noticeable on each end of the oval object, believed to be black in colour.

     

    Reported Separation: ~200ft/0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were such that they were unable to determine the nature of the unknown object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 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
    2019259

    01 Sep 19

    1605

    PA15

    (Civ FW)

    Drone

    5126N 00209W

    1nm N Corsham

    2300ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The PA15 pilot reports he was beginning his descent towards his destination airfield and as he passed though 2300ft he saw a white drone with 4 rotor arms pass down the left-hand-side of the aircraft, at a similar altitude.  It was about 200m from the port wingtip of the aircraft.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/ 200m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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
    2019260

    12 Aug 19

    1255

    CL605

    (Civ FW)

    Unk Obj

    5156N 00006W

    Ardeley

    3000ft

    London FIR

    (G)

    The CL605 pilot reports that he was being vectored for the approach at Luton when they saw a large red/orange drone ‘at the end of the left wingtip’. The pilot commented that the only reason a collision did not occur was because the aircraft had begun to turn left on to the base leg. Had this not been the case it was believed that the drone would have impacted the front of the aircraft or the left wing.

     

    Reported Separation: 0ft V/<50yd H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were such that they were unable to determine the nature of the unknown object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 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
    2019261

    01 Sep 19

    1830

    EMB170

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5135N 00008E

    Romford

    3000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The EMB 170 pilot reports he was conducting a SID when he visually acquired a small drone half a mile ahead and 100ft below.  The drone was difficult to distinguish against the urban background and the apparent high closure rate left little time for avoiding action.  It was a small consumer drone white with black or dark extremities and 4 rotors.  It appeared to be either in a hover, or in slow level flight aligned with their track.

     

    Reported Separation: 100ft V/ 0m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: Low

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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
    2019262

    29 Aug 19

    0957

    EMB175

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5233N 00140W

    Marston

    5500ft

    Daventry CTA

    (A)

    The EMB175 pilot reports descending from 6000ft to 5000ft when he saw something flying towards them. Anticipating a bird strike, he followed the flying

    object visually when he noticed it was a red and white drone flying opposite track. He reported it to ATC control.

     

    Reported Separation: ~200ft V/<1NM H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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 safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2019266

    1 Sep 19

    1705

    B777

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5127N 00047W

    Binfield

    6000ft

    London TMA

    (A)

    The B777 pilot reports departing LHR 27L on a Compton 3G. As they were levelling at 6000ft he observed a large grey drone pass slightly to the left and below. It was square in appearance and quite close; there was no time to avoid it.

     

    Reported Separation: 200-300ft

    Reported Risk of Collision: Not reported.

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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 safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

    B
    2019267

    05 Sep 19

    1818

    A320

    (CAT)

    Drone

    5119N 00003E

    3-4nm W BIG VOR

    FL70

    London TMA

    (A)

    The A320 pilot reports that they left the BIG hold on heading 270° at FL70, suddenly the FO spotted a drone at the 11 o’clock position.  He immediately reported it to the CMD, who also saw the drone just a second later on his left.  It was approximately 50m from the left wing and 20m below.  The colour was difficult to describe in the sunset, but it seemed to be sliver-grey with a red ‘spot’ (which could have been a reflection) on top.  The CMD had the impression that there were four landing aids attached to the underside of the drone. The FO reported the incident to ATC.

     

    Reported Separation: 20mV/ 50m H

    Reported Risk of Collision: High

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it could have been a drone.

     

    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
    2019275

    14 Sep 19

    0643

    EMB145

    (CAT)

    Unk Obj

    Dovestone Reservoir

    5332N 00159W

    4300ft

    Manchester CTR

    (D)

    The EMB170 pilot reports he was on final for the Manchester ILS RW23 when a drone, or object, came within 5m of striking the aircraft. It passed to the front right, slightly above 4300ft (approx. 2500agl).  The object was dark in colour, and thought to be a medium to large drone, there were no obvious lights and it appeared to be stationary at the time.  The sun was low at the time and the Capt had the sun visor down, the FO spotted it first and both crew members saw it as it went past.

     

    Reported Separation: 5m H

    In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the object were such that they were unable to determine the nature of the unknown object.

     

    Applicable Contributory Factors: 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