Monthly meeting June 2024

2023226

Skymantis (Civ UAS)

Dauphin (HQ JAC)

London FIR (G)

B

2023245

Wingtra (Civ UAS)

C310 (Civ UAS)

London FIR (G)

C

2023252

C150 (Civ FW)

PA32 (Civ FW)

Gamston ATZ (G)

A

2023253

C172 (A) (Civ FW)

C172 (B) (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

C

2023254

Escapade (Civ FW)

A400M (HQ Air (Ops)

London FIR (G)

E

2023255

TB200 (Civ FW)

Light aircraft (Unknown)

Leicester ATZ (G)

D

2023257

C172 (Civ FW)

TB20 (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

C

2023258

RANS S6 (Civ FW)

C152 (Civ Comm)

London FIR (G)

E

2023260

PA18 (Civ FW)

Prefect (HQ Air (Trg)

London FIR (G)

B

2023261

DA42 (Civ FW)

PA28 (Civ FW)

Perth ATZ (G)

B

2023266

A320 (CAT)

B737 (CAT)

London TMA (A)

C

2023268

H145 (Civ Comm)

DJI Matrice (Civ UAS)

Scottish FIR (G)

E

2024002

Cabri (Civ Helo)

C152 (Civ FW)

Leicester ATZ (G)

B

Recommendation: Leicester Aerodrome Operator reviews circuit procedures with a view to introducing greater lateral separation between fixed-wing and rotary-wing traffic on final approach.

2024006

T61 Venture (Civ FW)

Mooney (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

C

2024007

PA28 (Civ FW)

PA38 (Civ FW)

Liverpool CTR (D)

E

2024008

Wag-Aero CUBy(Civ FW)

C182 (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

C

2024009

TB10 (Civ FW)

TBM700 (Foreign Mil)

London FIR (G)

E

2024010

DA42 (Civ FW)

AW109 (Civ Helo)

London FIR (G)

E

2024011

DR400 (Civ FW)

S76 (Civ Comm)

Luton CTR (D)

E

2024012

Gnat T1 (Civ FW)

P2008 (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

B

2024015

C172 (Civ FW)

RV9 (Civ FW)

London FIR (G)

B

2024017

C152 (Civ FW)

PA28 (Civ FW)

Fairoaks ATZ (G)

C

0

2024064

14 Apr 24

1740

ERJ190

(CAT)

Drone

5130N 00010E

4NM E of LCY

2300ft

London City CTR

(D)

The ERJ190 pilot reports that a drone passed close to the aircraft. The aircraft was approximately 4NM out on the RW27 approach around 2300ft. [It was] seen by the First Officer and two passengers who described it as about 3ft square and a bronze/yellow colour. It went past very quickly so [was] hard to tell quite how close it came.

The London City controller reports that [the ERJ190] landed on RW27 at time 1742. After landing the pilot reported they thought they spotted a drone whilst at 6.5NM final. The aircraft was at altitude 3000ft at that point. No other information given. The correct reporting procedures were followed.

Reported Separation: NR

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 there was insufficient information to make a sound judgement of risk.

D

2024070

28 Apr 24

1912

A320

(CAT)

Unk Obj

5128N 00023W

2.5NM E LHR

700ft

London CTR

(D)

The A320 pilot reports that on finals and approximately 2.5NM to RW27L at LHR, an unknown object passed down the left-hand side of aircraft within the wingspan of the aircraft. [The pilot] only got a brief glimpse and noticed colours of blue, black and white. Initial thoughts [were that it could have been a] possible drone and immediately reported it to ATC. After landing they conferred with their colleague, whose initial thoughts [had been that it might have been] a balloon of similar colours. All information was passed on to ATC along with a filed ASR.

Reported Separation: <50ft

Reported Risk of Collision: Medium

The LHR controller reports that an A320 had been passing 700ft on final approach to RW27L and had reported a possible drone at 2.5NM on their left-hand side. Subsequent aircraft [pilots] were warned. The pilot subsequently filed an Airprox. This has been filed on behalf of the RW27L Air South Arrivals control.

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 providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

A

2024073

1 May 24

1507

A320

(CAT)

Drone

5325N 00245W

1NM NE Tarbock Island VRP

3000ft

Manchester CTA

(D)

The A320 pilot reports that a drone was spotted on the right-hand side of the aircraft, at the same altitude and approximately 100ft from the side.

Reported Separation: 0ft V/100ft H

Reported Risk of Collision: Low

The Liverpool controller reports that [the pilot of the A320] was downwind, right-hand, for RW27 at Liverpool, and at 2500ft altitude. They reported they had seen a drone at 3000ft over St Helens, just north of the M62. The flight continued without incident and landed safely.

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 although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

C

2024074

12 Apr 24

1300

Jodel D112

(Civ FW)

Balloon

5048N 00302W

2NM NW Axminster

2000ft

London FIR

(G)

The Jodel pilot reports that when about 2NM west of Axminster, heading north at 2000ft QNH, they sighted a purple object directly ahead on a reciprocal course. It immediately became apparent that it was a balloon, a helium balloon in the shape of a "0". It was one that would typically be used in parties, for example a 50th party where the person would have two balloons in the shape of "5" and "0". It passed by their port side about 50m away at exactly the same height. They estimated its size to be about a metre high and a metre wide. They reported the incident to Exeter radar at the time.

Reported Separation: 0ft V/ 50m H

Reported Risk of Collision: High

Exeter ATC report that they had no record of the Jodel pilot communicating with them and they also had no knowledge of any balloons operating in the vicinity of the airport at the time of the Airprox.

In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it was probably a balloon.

Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 5

Risk: The Board considered that, although safety had been reduced, there had been no risk of collision.

C

2024077

5 May 24

1551

Paraglider

(Civ Gld)

Drone

5426N 00258W

500m N Ambleside

1350ft

London FIR

(G)

The paraglider pilot reports they walked up to High Pike to set up, planning to fly back to land at a cricket ground next to where they had parked. They took off for the flight of about 5min and arrived with plenty of height close to where they were planning to land when they heard a buzzing noise, which they thought may have been a motorbike. They looked towards the road and noticed a drone coming in fast and then saw a second drone. The drones appeared to be fitted with GoPro cameras and were ‘playing around their wing’, coming in low over and below them. They continued on a straight and level flightpath hoping that they would move on. After ‘30 seconds’ of being buzzed they became increasingly concerned that the drones might hit them and decided to land as soon as possible. They put the wing into a spiral dive, lost altitude quickly and dived from 800ft to 150ft in about 10sec. They had ‘a small [canopy] collapse’ when they came out of the dive, which they corrected before they landed in a flat field.

Reported Separation: ‘above and below’/5ft H

Reported Risk of Collision: High

In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude and/or description of the objects were sufficient to indicate that it was a pair of drones.

Applicable Contributory Factors: 1, 2, 4, 7

Risk: The Board surmised that the drone operators would have been visual with the paraglider, but nonetheless considered that safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

B

2024084

05 May 24

1238

A319

(CAT)

Drone

5136N 00016W

18NM W of LAM VOR

FL80

London TMA

(A)

The A319 pilot reports that a large drone was spotted 30m left of track at FL80 18NM west of Lamborne VOR in IMC. No avoiding action taken due IMC.

Reported Separation: 30m H

Reported Risk of Collision: NR

The Heathrow INT North Radar controller reports that the A319 was downwind for RW09L at FL80 when the pilot reported a drone off their left wing. They estimated the position to be 18NM west of LAM. This information was reported to other aircraft in the area, but no further reports of the drone were made.

The NATS Safety Investigation reports that the A319 pilot submitted an Airprox report in response to the sighting of a drone whilst approximately 3.9NM SE of Elstree. It has been estimated that the [drone] was at FL81. Safety Investigations reviewed the radar at the time the pilot reported the sighting, however, no radar contacts associated with the drone were visible. The pilot reported that they had “just had a drone go over our left wing, very close”. The controller passed information on the reported drone to following aircraft, no further reports were received.

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, 7

Risk: The Board considered that providence had played a major part in the incident and/or a definite risk of collision had existed.

A

2024101

20 Mar 24

1343

R44

(Civ Comm)

Model ac

5119N 00015W

Epsom Downs

1200ft

London FIR

(G)

The R44 pilot reports that they were conducting a pipeline patrol over Epsom Downs race-course, established at 1200ft on Heathrow QNH and on frequency 125.625MHz.

A model-aircraft passed down their left-hand-side, not seen until abeam. They think it was red and black. They estimate that there had been no more than 100ft separation. Their Observer estimated 30ft

separation and it was on their side. It was reported to the Heathrow controller who ‘verified’ the altitude.

Reported Separation: “30ft”

Reported Risk of Collision: NR

In the Board’s opinion the reported altitude or description of the object were sufficient to indicate that it was probably a model aircraft.

Applicable Contributory Factors: 4, 7

Risk: The Board considered that safety had been much reduced below the norm to the extent that safety had not been assured.

B