Assessment Summary Sheet
Contributory factor assessment for each assessed Airprox can be downloaded.
| Total | Risk A | Risk B | Risk C | Risk D | Risk E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 12 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 2 |
| Airprox | Aircraft 1 (Type) | Aircraft 2 (Type) | Airspace (Class) | ICAO Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021020 | P68 (Civ Comm) | C172 (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | C |
| 2021023 | C17 (HQ Air Ops) | DA40 (Civ FW) | Brize CTR (D) | C |
| 2021024 | AW139 (Civ Comm) | Ventus 2cT (Civ Gld) | London FIR (G) | E |
| 2021029 | C152 (Civ FW) | B209 (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | A |
| 2021032 | ASK13 (Civ Gld) | Falke (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | A |
| 2021033 | Embraer 145 (CAT) | R22 (Civ Helo) | Humberside ATZ (G) | E |
| 2021034 | PA28 (Civ FW) | C182 (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | C |
| 2021035 | Drone (Civ UAS) | DR400 (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | B |
| 2021036 | PA28(A) (Civ FW) | PA28(B) (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | C |
| 2021037 | PA28 (Civ FW) | Zenair CH-601 (Civ FW) | Scottish FIR (G) | B |
| 2021038 | PA28(1) (Civ FW) | PA28(2) (Civ FW) | Waltham ATZ (G) | B |
| 2021050 | SZD 51 Junior (Civ Gld) | PA28 (Civ FW) | London FIR (G) | C |
Consolidated Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Summary Sheet
Contributory factor assessment for each Drone/Balloon/Model/Unknown Object Airprox can be downloaded.
| Total | Risk A | Risk B | Risk C | Risk D | Risk E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2021066 |
31 May 21 1718 |
A319 (CAT) |
Unk Obj |
5134N 00009W 12NM NE Heathrow FL095 |
London TMA (A) |
The A319 pilot reports that the aircraft was climbing through FL095 and was roughly 8NM SE Brookmans Park, when a drone was spotted. It was black and orange in colour and about 50cm in size. It went from the left to pass down the right-hand-side of the aircraft some tens of metres below. Reported Separation: 20-50m V/<100m H Reported Risk of Collision: Low A NATS Investigation reported that on reaching FL150 the A319 pilot reported to the TC North controller that they had had a drone sighting when passing FL080 in the climb, approximately 12NM north-east of Heathrow. The pilot reported that the drone passed beneath the right-hand-side of the aircraft and was black and orange. The event was reported to the police. A review of the radar confirmed that there were no associated primary or secondary contacts visible on the radar at the approximate time of the event. |
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: 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 |
| 2021071 |
3 Jun 21 0811 |
BE200 (Civ Comm) |
Balloon |
5153N 00014E Stansted Airport 1000ft |
Stansted CTR (D) |
The BE200 pilot reports that they departed from Stansted RW22 on the UTAVA1R SID. At approximately 1000ft AMSL, they noticed what appeared to be an elongated silver and sparkly party balloon. With no time to react, the balloon just missed the port wing, passing slightly underneath. The Acting First Officer called the near miss to ATC and the flight was continued to its destination without further incident. Upon reaching the destination, the Approach controller informed them of a message from ATC at Stansted: “Just to let you know the party balloon turned out to be a number 7 and landed on the runway just after you departed>". Reported Separation: NR Reported Risk of Collision: NR |
In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude or description of the object, and the confirmation provided by ATC at Stansted, were sufficient to indicate that it was a balloon. Applicable Contributory Factors: 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 |
| 2021075 |
3 Jun 21 1647 |
A220 (CAT) |
Drone |
5128N 00006W 12NM E Heathrow 4000ft |
London TMA (A) |
The A220 pilot reports that they were on the Heathrow RW27R ILS at around 12NM final and 4000ft when the First Officer noticed a drone on their right-hand side. At first, they thought it was a balloon but, when the object passed by, they could clearly identify that it was a drone. It was slightly above their aircraft and was black with a prominent red horizontal line. It was a large drone with 4 big propellers on the corners. It was difficult to estimate the separation and when reported to the police they gave an optical estimate, which the police officer photographed. Reported Separation: 100ft V/ 0.5NM H Reported Risk of Collision: NR |
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, 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 |
[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.