This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/23/world/europe/gatwick-airport-drones.html

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 3 Version 4
‘Damaged’ Drone Found as Couple Detained Over Gatwick Airport Chaos Are Released ‘Damaged’ Drone Found Near Gatwick; Arrested Couple Are Freed Without Charge
(about 4 hours later)
LONDON — A married couple in Britain who were detained in connection with the illegal use of drones at Gatwick Airport, sowing three days of chaos and forcing the grounding or diverting of more than 1,000 flights, were released on Sunday without being charged, the police in Sussex said. LONDON — A married couple in Britain who were detained in connection with the illegal use of drones that sowed three days of chaos at Gatwick Airport were released on Sunday without charge, and the police said they had recovered a “damaged” drone near the airport that was being forensically examined.
Detective Chief Superintendent Jason Tingley said in a statement, “Both people have fully cooperated with our enquiries and I am satisfied that they are no longer suspects in the drone incidents at Gatwick.” Gatwick Airport also announced it was offering a 50,000-pound reward (about $63,000) for information leading to “the arrest and conviction of those responsible for the criminal act that disrupted flights.”
The police also told local reporters at a news briefing on Sunday at Gatwick that they had recovered a “damaged” drone near the airport and that it would be forensically examined. No further details were available. The couple had been arrested on suspicion of disrupting civil aviation services and endangering people or operations, the police said in a statement. They are both from Crawley, a town just south of the airport, and the husband’s Facebook page suggested that he was a drone hobbyist, and they included several photos of remote-controlled helicopters.
Gatwick Airport, meanwhile, is offering a 50,000-pound reward (about $63,000) “for information leading to the arrest and conviction of those responsible for the criminal act that disrupted flights,” the police said. But on Sunday, Detective Chief Superintendent Jason Tingley of the Sussex police said in a statement, “Both people have fully cooperated with our enquiries and I am satisfied that they are no longer suspects in the drone incidents at Gatwick.”
The two people detained were identified by Henry Smith, a member of Parliament whose constituency includes Gatwick Airport, as Paul Gait, 47, and his wife Elaine Kirk, 54. The first drone sighting was reported around 9 p.m. Wednesday, forcing officials to shut down the airport’s one runway in West Sussex, south of London, and ground or divert more than 1,000 flights over three days; the runway was buzzed more than 40 times within 48 hours.
They had been held since Friday night on suspicion of disrupting civil aviation services and endangering people or operations, according to the police. The chaos affected more than 140,000 passengers in Britain and reverberated around the world, delaying tens of thousands of people traveling for the holidays. Britons and some lawmakers criticized officials’ response to the drone incursions, with some wondering why the police did not shoot down the device.
Police officials had said they arrested a man and a woman of the same ages in connection with the investigation, but they did not identify them. Officials said they had shut down the airport for fear that a drone could cause the deadly crash of a passenger plane by flying into its windows or getting sucked into an engine. The police described the drones seen as “industrial” models, and were not treating the incident as terrorism-related.
The couple are both from Crawley, a town just south of the airport, and the police were seen searching a home in the area, according to local news reports. Mr. Gait’s Facebook page suggested that he was a drone hobbyist, and they included several photos of remote-controlled helicopters. The drone incursions raised questions about the safety of Britain’s airports and the slow process of establishing a national registry for drone operators, which is planned for November.
On Sunday, the Sussex police said that the couple would not be officially identified, and that the investigation into the drone incursions continued at Britain’s second-busiest airport, which is about 25 miles south of central London. The couple were arrested on Friday night, after the airport had been shut down and reopened several times, and as the frustration of travelers were mounting. In a phone interview Sunday night, Chief Tingley said that they had been held for “approximately 35 hours” for questioning because the police “needed to be really sure what we were dealing with.”
Officials had feared that a drone could cause a deadly crash of a passenger plane by flying into windows or being sucked into a plane’s engine. The police had described the drones as “industrial” models and were not treating the incident as terrorism-related. He defended the arrests as “lawful,” but criticized the public disclosure of “personal details” about the couple and information about the investigation. The couple’s age, identities and images were first published by The Telegraph. A member of Parliament, Henry Smith, whose constituency includes Gatwick Airport, identified the couple to The New York Times.
But on Sunday, drone experts raised the specter of copycat drone flights at Gatwick and other airports, as officials slammed what they called a slow response. The Sussex police have declined to officially name the couple, and the chief said the police had offered them “full support” after they were released — including the presence of two officers outside their home if they needed it.
Since a brief shutdown on Friday after a suspected drone sighting, no new drone incursions have been reported at Gatwick, and a steady stream of flights has resumed, with some delays. Chief Tingley said the damaged drone was found on Saturday morning near the perimeter fencing of Gatwick, in the small town of Horley, by a member of the public who alerted the police. He said an examination by a forensic science team in Britain was being “prioritized and fast-tracked.”
The airport’s one runway in West Sussex was buzzed more than 40 times within 48 hours since the first sighting on Wednesday night. Investigators are looking for two things he said: digital data on the drone and human DNA. He added, “We expect results within the next 12 hours.”
Officials called in the Army to provide technical assistance, and the airport said Friday on social media, “The military measures we have in place at the airport have provided us with reassurance necessary to reopen our airfield.” Earlier, he told the BBC that the authorities had an “open mind” about whether the device found could be one of the drones that had buzzed Gatwick Airport, Britain’s second-busiest. He said the authorities were sifting “many reports of drone activities” over the past few days, poring over CCTV footage and making house-to-house searches.
On Sunday, drone experts speaking on television raised the specter of copycat drone flights at Gatwick and other airports. But since Gatwick shut down briefly on Friday after a suspected drone sighting, no new drone incursions have been reported nearby, and a steady stream of flights resumed, with some delays.
Officials had called in the Army to provide technical assistance, and the airport said Friday on social media, “The military measures we have in place at the airport have provided us with reassurance necessary to reopen our airfield.”
The chief said when it came to handling a rogue drone, specialist officers on the ground always had the “tactical option to shoot it down.” In fact, he said, a commander had given them the authority to do just that within the first 12 hours of the drone sighting.
But he noted that the drones move quickly, and shooting at the devices would have been untenable because the police were not likely to shoot at other parts of the airport when people are around.