Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s LAB goes into 2019 with six fewer MPs than it had at

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited December 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s LAB goes into 2019 with six fewer MPs than it had at GE2017

Labour now has six MPs who have quit or been suspended since the 2017 general election

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.
  • Oh and e pluribus unum time.
  • FPT
    tlg86 said:


    The Government could have taken the UKIP approach and simply repealed the 1972 European Communities Act and not bothered with A50 at all.

    That would have run the risk of the UK becoming a 'lawless' country.

    With great swathes of law not applicable anymore and nothing in its stead.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    edited December 2018
    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?
  • RobD said:

    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?

    I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368
    Hopkins will of course vote with Corbyn whatever happens

    Onasanya will presumably be busy going forward.

    O'Mara is an unknown quantity - does he turn up, or does he draw his grievance, his breath and his salary?

    The other three, however, owe Corbyn in particular no favours. They might decide to be awkward.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 71,930
    edited December 2018
    James.

    Edit: Dammnit, ydoethur ruined my history lesson joke.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346

    RobD said:

    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?

    I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.
    What did Garak say about coincidences? :p
  • RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?

    I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.
    What did Garak say about coincidences? :p
    Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.

    The one about the boy who cried wolf.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 4,682
    Quick evening all :)

    Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.

    I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.

    Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?

    I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.
    What did Garak say about coincidences? :p
    Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.

    The one about the boy who cried wolf.
    Oh, that is a good one.

    For those that haven’t seen it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,385

    If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.

    Seems a bit harsh on Mrs May.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368

    RobD said:

    RobD said:

    I, II, and III? Where’s that judge-led inquiry?

    I was writing Sunday's thread and uploading another thread, and saw Mike was about to publish this, is a perk of the job.
    What did Garak say about coincidences? :p
    Funny you should mention Garak, an upcoming thread features a Garak quote.

    The one about the boy who cried wolf.
    Oddly, I was thinking about the boy who cried wolf when I pointed out the reason nobody believes Corbyn now is because he's lied so often in the past.

    But since he never tells the same lie twice, the Garak solution doesn't really apply here.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,839

    FPT

    tlg86 said:


    The Government could have taken the UKIP approach and simply repealed the 1972 European Communities Act and not bothered with A50 at all.

    That would have run the risk of the UK becoming a 'lawless' country.

    With great swathes of law not applicable anymore and nothing in its stead.
    That's as maybe, but if would have implemented the result a lot quicker!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368
    Nigelb said:

    If she doesn't stand down, I think she's very likely to be recalled.

    Seems a bit harsh on Mrs May.

    Well, Onasanya seems to have imperfect recall, so she'd probably be OK.
  • There May come times when JC (as Ms Onasanya would no doubt call him) might need every vote to form a government. Having to haggle with those outside the whip, at least two of whom look to be in the “hell freeze over” category, might be very awkward indeed.
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,459
    Incidentally, I recall it being mentioned earlier this evening that Corbyn's Parliamentary Party is now smaller than Gordon Brown's was after the 2010 election.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    Scott_P said:
    Haven’t those now been hyped beyond all proportion? Damp squib here we come.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368

    Incidentally, I recall it being mentioned earlier this evening that Corbyn's Parliamentary Party is now smaller than Gordon Brown's was after the 2010 election.

    That's quite funny as well.

    But remember, he only got 29% to Corbyn's 39.99%.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Haven’t those now been hyped beyond all proportion? Damp squib here we come.
    Isn't that what Stormy Daniels said?

    I'll get my coat...

    Good night.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 15,368
    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    Can Parliament quickly pass a law changing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment? :p
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    Donny43 said:
    At least some flights could be rescheduled.
  • RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    Can Parliament quickly pass a law changing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment? :p
    They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    Can Parliament quickly pass a law changing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment? :p
    They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.
    Hm, know anywhere I can get a cheap drone?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,385
    RobD said:

    Scott_P said:
    Haven’t those now been hyped beyond all proportion? Damp squib here we come.
    If the fact that he’s been forced to shut down a charity, which appears to have been run criminally, and more or less entirely, as a slush fund for him and his family, doesn’t bother his supporters.... then it seems unlikely his tax returns will, either.

  • Donny43Donny43 Posts: 634

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    Can Parliament quickly pass a law changing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment? :p
    They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.
    You need to be careful about offering incentives.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.

    The only explanation I can conceive is that we are not being told the entire truth, and HMG is worried that the drone is full of Novichok, or whatever.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,208
    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

  • DruttDrutt Posts: 137
    edited December 2018
    Has anyone read the Cooper / Morgan / Letwin / Boles et al amendment to the Finance Bill?
    Here's a tweet of it (sorry, linky no worky):



    On my reading, it (if passed) stops the Treasury making any minor or consequential amendments to help make tax law work post-Brexit unless there is a WA, an A50 extension or a HoC-approved no-deal.

    Any tax lawyers around to tell me whether they can spot any VAT or similar loopholes that would appear if this passed and there were no deal? Needless to say, my usual tax silk, Mr Maugham of Devereux Chambers, has has hands full right now.

    Edit: linky does worky.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.
  • stodge said:

    Quick evening all :)

    Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.

    I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.

    Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.

    Both Hopkins and Field are strongly pro-Brexit. I doubt they will vote against anything that threatens Brexit.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Any titbits you can share?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,385
    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Any idea how quickly we could get lasers fitted to these and deploy them ?
    https://en.globes.co.il/en/article-rafael-to-sell-6-anti-drone-systems-to-uk-1001250393
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    Scott_P said:
    We should conduct government purely in response to opinion polling? Real smart move, professor, why do I get the impression if it was something you didn't want you would not agree with other polling?
  • rpjsrpjs Posts: 1,509
    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Where's Torchwood when you need them?
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,208
    Chameleon said:

    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.
    You don't necessarily find an operator via tracking their UAV.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 9,385
    Donny43 said:

    RobD said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    Can Parliament quickly pass a law changing the maximum punishment to life imprisonment? :p
    They should make sure the person(s) behind this can only eat pizzas with pineapples on them for the rest of their lives.
    You need to be careful about offering incentives.
    No, i think TSE might see the collateral removal of pineapple pizza lovers from society as win/win.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 24,263

    stodge said:

    Quick evening all :)

    Slightly disingenuous title as there's a big difference between having the whip withdrawn and completely leaving the party as Lewis and Woodcock have done.

    I imagine both O'Mara and Hopkins would continue to support Labour - frank Field I don't know about.

    Despite this, the Opposition (with the DUP) would have the numbers to defeat the Government if they could all find themselves in the same lobby.

    Both Hopkins and Field are strongly pro-Brexit. I doubt they will vote against anything that threatens Brexit.
    Other than voting against the Brexit deal? :lol:
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    SeanT said:

    ydoethur said:

    Scott_P said:
    When they find this person, I am beginning to think they will have to arrest him(?) and keep him in custody for a very long time if only for his own protection.

    Nos da.
    This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.

    The only explanation I can conceive is that we are not being told the entire truth, and HMG is worried that the drone is full of Novichok, or whatever.
    Drones don't add up, someone will have had to have spent over £15k in drones (either on a few very high end commercial ones, or many high end consumer drones). If someone like green peace is doing it, they'd claim responsibility when media coverage is at it's peak.

    Plus surely the military would have the tech to detect and track such things, plus the staggered moving back makes no sense either (19:00 reopening at 4:15, 20:00 at 4:30, 22:00 at 4:45ish).

    On the flip side if there is a credible threat against one or many planes then drones are a convenient excuse to ground everything and search.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    edited December 2018
    Y0kel said:

    Chameleon said:

    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.
    You don't necessarily find an operator via tracking their UAV.
    Yeah, you'd likely have to do it via who's been purchasing drones/ who owns commercial drones etc, not going to be a quick process, or seeing if there is anything to recover from any abandoned drones.
  • Chameleon said:

    If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.

    Possible too that the drones have a 4G connection and are taking flightpath instructions from a compromised server.
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,208
    edited December 2018
    RobD said:

    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Any titbits you can share?
    None really. I chatted to someone earlier who understands the techie detail in a way that I don't and their view was that the countermeasure tools available are limited both in scope and availability (ie Plod doesn't have them to hand) and the authorities have just been caught napping. Using some of the possible technical countermeasures at night seems to be more attractive but in truth pretty much all tools have a possibility of collateral damage.

    The greater concern, looking at it from where I'm sitting, is motivation
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 4,715
    edited December 2018
    I guess the important question this thread raises is what happens next time if Lab gets a very small majority (or Lab + allies have a very small majority).

    If the above happens it'll then be critical for Lab to keep all its MPs on board - but will Corbyn be able to do so - in particular if he tries to implement any "radical" policies which aren't in the manifesto.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,341
    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    It is rather strange. I wonder how long it will be before people begin to ask serious questions of our capability to control our own airspace.
  • RoyalBlueRoyalBlue Posts: 2,926
    Maybe it’s the Vulcans?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 24,263
    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    It is rather strange. I wonder how long it will be before people begin to ask serious questions of our capability to control our own airspace.
    It's funny how futurologists always used to predict we'd have flying cars. They never thought about air traffic control for them.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 9,839
    Y0kel said:

    RobD said:

    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Any titbits you can share?
    None really. I chatted to someone earlier who understands the techie detail in a way that I don't and their view was that the countermeasure tools available are limited both in scope and availability (ie Plod doesn't have them to hand) and the authorities have just been caught napping. Using some of the possible technical countermeasures at night seems to be more attractive but in truth pretty much all tools have a possibility of collateral damage.

    The greater concern, looking at it from where I'm sitting, is motivation
    The authorities are probably taking the view that it's better to take the financial hit and give themselves more of a chance to find the person or people doing it.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    Why do you always go for the most dramatic, most spectacular reason for everything?

    Oh yes, you're a writer. ;)

    Much more likely: there's more than one of them, they can be hard to shoot, and what goes up (especially bullets) must come down - an issue if they're in a residential area. And a side issue is that it may be harder to catch the scrotes who are doing this, and whether they'll just pop another drone up in an hour.

    though they may well end up resorting to shooting them if this continues.

    As someone who hates flying, who flies as infrequently as I can, and sees flying as a privilege rather than a right (I mean, do you know the tech behind flying? The blades of a jet turbine operate for hours well above their meltiing point, ffs - that's near magic), I'm finding this quite entertaining.

    Though I can understand it may ruin many peoples' Christmases. But no-one's dying.
  • ralphmalphralphmalph Posts: 1,087
    edited December 2018
    MikeL said:

    I guess the important question this thread raises is what happens next time if Lab gets a very small majority (or Lab + allies have a very small majority).

    If the above happens it'll then be critical for Lab to keep all its MPs on board - but will Corbyn be able to do so - in particular if he tries to implement any "radical" policies which aren't in the manifesto.

    There is a view that instead of splitting now to form another Social Democratic Party the centrist Lab MP's have decided to keep their heads down and if Corbyn is elected resign the whip and then vote against him so he can do no damage.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Y0kel said:

    RobD said:

    Y0kel said:

    The authorities are hoping for a late night visit from the drone(s) because of the health and safety issues around the limited tools available. If they have the technical countermeasures available then it is a better time to use them.

    The best way to halt things though is to eliminate the operator(s).

    Any titbits you can share?
    None really. I chatted to someone earlier who understands the techie detail in a way that I don't and their view was that the countermeasure tools available are limited both in scope and availability (ie Plod doesn't have them to hand) and the authorities have just been caught napping. Using some of the possible technical countermeasures at night seems to be more attractive but in truth pretty much all tools have a possibility of collateral damage.

    The greater concern, looking at it from where I'm sitting, is motivation
    I've seen footage of the drone taken by a passenger trapped on a plane. It's quite big, so an easy target for an expert sniper. It might crash through a roof, I suppose, but surely that's a risk worth taking - evacuate the small, immediate dangerzone, tell everyone else to stay indoors.

    Then shoot it down. What am I missing?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,341
    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    edited December 2018

    Chameleon said:

    If it is drones, there will be no operator, they'll be launched with pre-programmed flightpaths, with no communication to the outside world, they can stay low for long enough for the launchers to drive a decent distance away before the drone approaches Gatwick. No chance of finding the perpetrators that way.

    Possible too that the drones have a 4G connection and are taking flightpath instructions from a compromised server.
    Very true, I suspect a large amount of the issues stem from how little we (and potentially the police/Gatwick) know. How many drones do the operators have (i.e. how long can they keep this up for/if one is shot down will another just take it's place)? What type of drone (impacts on how it could be taken down)? Are they being recovered and relaunched or just ditched? How are they controlled? Why?

    As someone who is flying out of Gatwick on Christmas day I hope that all the answers are known soon.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,647
    kle4 said:

    We should conduct government purely in response to opinion polling? Real smart move, professor, why do I get the impression if it was something you didn't want you would not agree with other polling?

    Yeah can't see Brian saying something similar about the sort of punishments the public would support for child murderers.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,459
    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    Apply Occam's Razor. The most straightforward explanation is that the coppers are telling the truth when they say they're afraid to shoot it down because of the risk of collateral damage.

    After all, imagine the amount of screaming if so much as a pigeon, let alone a human being, gets hit by a stray bullet. The independent inquiry. The sobbing. The accusations that not enough care was taken. Safety compromised for the sake of getting a few people away on holiday. Oh God, how could they be so heartless?! The litigation. The court cases. The seven-figure compensation payouts. The ruined careers (both of whichever poor fucker fired the bullet, and whichever senior officer gave them permission to start shooting.)

    Makes standing around like a bunch of lemons (whilst claiming generous helpings of overtime) look much the best option for Sussex Police, doesn't it?
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,208
    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    Because its really hard to hit it with small arms even when hovvering. The blunt force with firearms is to just load thousands of rounds up there which then leads to what happens to all the rounds that miss. I believe you hung about Beirut. Shooting a lot in the air, not always so clever.

    Missiles = debris, large calibre AA weapons...not sure we have any.

    In another country, sure just let rip, but this is Britain and clipboards and hi vis vests have big influence on actions.
  • SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    It's aliens, innit?
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    Or just do it at night :p
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,610
    edited December 2018
    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?

    As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    Probably many things. For one, you will be alerting the drone operators as well, and if they have some form of control link, they can just lower it in height - say in front of a nice, convenient tower block that will provide a convenient backdrop for the bullets to hit - or some other sh*t thing.

    Perhaps the drones are darting around unpredictably, or using cover before hopping up.

    We're suffering from a lack of information, and the authorities may also be lacking critical information.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    edited December 2018
    Fun fact, Surrey and Sussex police spent £250,000 on four new state of the art drones less than three years ago.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,647
    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    SeanT said:

    What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?

    As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse

    El Reg is not obscure.

    Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ... ;)
  • Y0kelY0kel Posts: 2,208
    edited December 2018
    Completely unrelated but the German authorities are after four believed to be planning an attack on an airport in France or Germany. Not clear whether they have them in custody or are looking for them.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
    To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    When being trained on anti-drone techniques Police routinely get told to consider that there could be some form of explosive attached to the drone, and that the entire release system is available online to 3D print. Last thing the police want to happen is to shoot a drone down into someone's garden and the entire house goes boom, or a busy road, or a roof, or a...
  • glwglw Posts: 4,647

    SeanT said:

    What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?

    As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse

    El Reg is not obscure.

    Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ... ;)
    ++
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    Probably many things. For one, you will be alerting the drone operators as well, and if they have some form of control link, they can just lower it in height - say in front of a nice, convenient tower block that will provide a convenient backdrop for the bullets to hit - or some other sh*t thing.

    Perhaps the drones are darting around unpredictably, or using cover before hopping up.

    We're suffering from a lack of information, and the authorities may also be lacking critical information.
    OK then, nuke Sussex.
  • Ave_itAve_it Posts: 1,104
    Are there any drones affecting LAB at the moment?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,341
    Ave_it said:

    Are there any drones affecting LAB at the moment?

    Widow Twankey droning on about her deal?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 13,145
    Trump supporters angry at his 'retreat' on border wall

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46637773
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,293

    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
    To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...
    On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.

    Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,341
    Foxy said:

    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
    To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...
    On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.

    Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 22,517
    SeanT said:

    SeanT said:

    Jonathan said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    This is good.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/20/gatwick_drone_non_shootdown_reasons/
    That's very helpful but it still doesn't quite answer the question

    So a police rifle bullet might hit someone within 2.5km of the shooter. So you just tell everyone in the dangerzone to stay indoors for the few minutes of the shooting. It's not fun, it would sound weird, but it's better than Britain's second biggest airport being fucked for days, losing tens of millions and screwing many thousands of trips and holidays and business meets etc

    A falling bullet won't go through a roof. So everyone in Crawley has to go indoors for ten minutes, so what.

    Again, what am I missing?
    Probably many things. For one, you will be alerting the drone operators as well, and if they have some form of control link, they can just lower it in height - say in front of a nice, convenient tower block that will provide a convenient backdrop for the bullets to hit - or some other sh*t thing.

    Perhaps the drones are darting around unpredictably, or using cover before hopping up.

    We're suffering from a lack of information, and the authorities may also be lacking critical information.
    OK then, nuke Sussex.
    Well, it'll certainly solve the problem. ;)

    On another point, I always assumed the danger to aircraft would be from lasers: there have been cases of simple laser pointers dazzling pilots (and it was a plot point from a Tom Clancy book decades ago). If this was to be terror-related, then that sort of thing might be best.

    Except: there is a small problem that the laser beam points straight back in a 'Yes, authorities, I am here' way. In addition, because it is a known issue, there might be systems in place to mitigate it. P'haps.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 6,610
    glw said:

    SeanT said:

    What is definitely lacking in Gatwick is some top cop or politician just coming out and calmly explaining the problem, and why it isn't easily fixable. Why do we need to rely on obscure websites?

    As ever, it is the absence of info and the habit of secrecy which makes the situation worse

    El Reg is not obscure.

    Next you'll be saying that ARS Technica is not obligatory reading for everyone ... ;)
    ++
    I understood that reference!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 6,293
    Jonathan said:

    Ave_it said:

    Are there any drones affecting LAB at the moment?

    Widow Twankey droning on about her deal?
    Oh yes she is!

    Where's the villains? behind her...
  • AndrewAndrew Posts: 1,133
    SeanT said:

    This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.


    Presumably if they can get close enough to shoot it, they could follow it (police helicopter, or another drone) to find the perp.

    Suggests to me there are multiple throwaway drones.
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Look at the underlying data, these are aspirations.

    A large majority do not want a poll at all, whatever Brexit delivers.

    I've been reading some Irish media this last week, they REALLY don't want a Border poll either, even down South (they are terrified of the demons it might invoke, and who can blame them)

    The Irish don't want Brexit, they hate it. But they also hate the idea of a Border poll. It's not going to happen for the foreseeable.

    Another thing I learned from reading Irish papers and comments is that there are hints - just hints, at the moment - that they they are willing to blame Varadkar (if we Hard Brexit), for being so opposed to compromise.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 1,955
    BBC news confirms that they do not know what make or model it is.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    Andrew said:

    SeanT said:

    This is very odd. Why can't they just tell everyone to get indoors and then shoot the fucker down. Gatwick is losing millions and its reputation is worsening (if that's possible). 100,000 people are stuck. WTF. Shoot It Down. If it shatters a greenhouse who cares.


    Presumably if they can get close enough to shoot it, they could follow it (police helicopter, or another drone) to find the perp.

    Suggests to me there are multiple throwaway drones.
    Weren't they described as rather large drones? Not cheap...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 38,291
    SeanT said:

    Another thing I learned from reading Irish papers and comments is that there are hints - just hints, at the moment - that they they are willing to blame Varadkar (if we Hard Brexit), for being so opposed to compromise.
    Small comfort to us unless we get lucky and no deal is not as bad as feared.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 6,753

    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
    To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...
    Just watched Mark Kermode's Christmas Films programme on BBC... He claims Die Hard is a Christmas movie - WTF?!
  • SeanTSeanT Posts: 21,750
    Foxy said:

    glw said:

    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    This is obviously a shit future Die Hard reboot without Bruce Willis.
    To be fair, the last few Die Hard films with Bruce Willis have been shit ...
    On this important topic, Mark Kermode has delivered the decisive verdict on BBC Four, in his review of Christmas Movies, Die Hard is a Christmas Movie. Well worth catching on iplayer btw, like the rest of his series.

    Mid you, he clims that Planes, Trains and Automobiles is too...

    Mark Kermode thinks the Exorcist is possibly the greatest movie ever made. He is right. He should get a knighthood.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 40,941
    So the same government that doesn't have the technology to stop a single drone will have the technology to police the Irish border in 3 months time...
  • Black_RookBlack_Rook Posts: 2,459
    Y0kel said:

    SeanT said:

    SHOOT. DOWN, THE. DRONE.

    FFS. I cannot see why this isn't done UNLESS they have evidence that the drone is a threat if brought down: a dirty bomb, nerve gas, etc

    Which is kinda worrying.

    Because its really hard to hit it with small arms even when hovvering. The blunt force with firearms is to just load thousands of rounds up there which then leads to what happens to all the rounds that miss. I believe you hung about Beirut. Shooting a lot in the air, not always so clever.

    Missiles = debris, large calibre AA weapons...not sure we have any.

    In another country, sure just let rip, but this is Britain and clipboards and hi vis vests have big influence on actions.
    viewcode said:

    I've just had a thought.

    It's coming up to Christmas.
    A major airport is under attack in an implausible hi-tech manner.

    Pause.

    So...is this a "Die Hard" movie???

    Die Hard with a Clipboard

    In which the plods do battle with faceless, havoc-causing, drone wielding terrorists - whilst adhering to any and all requirements laid down in the Health and Safety At Work etc. Act 1974.

    In the pivotal scene, the controller of the drones is tracked down to a suburban semi in Crawley after an urgent and breathless manhunt involving fifteen weeks of door-to-door enquiries and an intensive Twitter campaign.

    The mastermind transpires to be a trans woman whom, after being taken into custody, is found to have a previously undiagnosed personality disorder that was inadequately treated after the court-appointed psychiatrist failed to properly evaluate her after detention. A case is launched under the Human Rights Act which results in all charges of improper drone usage being dropped and an undisclosed settlement for damages (rumoured to be in the region of £250,000) being paid.

    Airport goes bankrupt with loss of 10,000 jobs. Human rights advocate receives CBE in next New Year's Honours list. Drone mastermind writes best-selling misery memoir and is given a regular column in The Guardian.

    The End.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 35,346
    Chameleon said:

    BBC news confirms that they do not know what make or model it is.

    The BBC are investigating it too? :p
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 10,341
    edited December 2018
    Chameleon said:

    BBC news confirms that they do not know what make or model it is.

    It could be aliens summoned by Brexit. Has anyone ruled that out?

    Better still, a bit of dirt on the radar scanner scope.
This discussion has been closed.