In the news

'We' had this problem 20 years ago;
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/may/11/vikramdodd

When an airport like Gatwick shuts down it may be that declaring a fuel emergency is a good way to get to the front of the queue and ensure that you are diverted to Luton and not to Prestwick.

Pretty sure this isn't a million miles away from what life in sovereignty land will be like.

Are there deportation flights going on?
Extinction Rebellion publicise everything, it's their thing. I would've thought other climate change activists would take responsibility too - they're trying to increase awareness.

This is probably policy for no frills airlines.

Stansted was always the 'overflow' airport for London,
and,
the landing strip designated for hijacked planes.

What does Chris Grayling do all day?
He clearly has no grasp of the Rail network.
Road system seems no better.
He has been found asleep at his desk on drone defence policy.

Perhaps he spends a couple of hours a day in the Ministerial limo
with the driver detailed to follow the routes of Cycle Super Highways,
so he can try to door more cyclists?

There was also Jada Fransen being arrested at Gatwick a few hours before the drone first showed up, but by now I reckon the sophistication of this leaves the Britain First muppets out of the picture.

The police have said they are 'industrial' drones and not something that could be picked up from Argos.

Although they still don't seem to have identified what they actually were so...

Pilots don't declare a fuel emergency unless it's actually an emergency and there would be serious repercussions if one was caught doing it just to queue jump.

@radar are we talking actual emergencies or just a few pan pans?

Would you admit to having been out-foxed (sorry) for 30+ hours by a £19.99 flying toy?
Or would you big it up?
I'm not saying it wasn't a commercial spec drone - more that the line from the police is one to be expected.
Strange that although we have many sightings, we still have no ID on the drone - not even type.
I know they've said it's comm. spec. - Am I wrong to expect illustrations thereof?

Not sure, just anectdotal for now.

For reference, in the UK you get zero priority for sequencing, landing, diversion etc. if you complain of being a bit short of fuel or whatever. Pilot has to declare either a PAN PAN (urgency) if they think they may land with fuel below final reserve, or MAYDAY (distress) if they know that they will. Either of these will usually see the seas parted before them.

The problem when you have the second largest UK airport suddenly close is that you are likely to have multiple instances of PAN PAN or MAYDAY and so they have to be prioritised, along with everyone else who hasn’t declared an emergency yet.

This is probably policy for no frills airlines.

No. It used to be a sneaky trick to get to the front of the queue that some airlines used, saying they were a bit low on fuel even when they weren’t. Now we have the policy where you declare an emergency, or you get nothing. The implications of declaring an emergency are that reports are generated and an investigation takes place, as @Fox alluded to above.

The problem when you have the second largest UK airport suddenly close is that you are likely to have multiple instances of PAN PAN or MAYDAY and so they have to be prioritised, along with everyone else who hasn’t declared an emergency yet.

Shouldn't all flights have enough fuel for 1st reserve airport though?

Sounds fishy all round. Air control wanting to up the anti on drone licenses , claims of drones flying for hours but knowone knows when or where they came from . Police not arsed as they are understaffed and this is not an emergency and no resources available . Persons of interest means who ?

I'm old fashioned in that I presume the police are telling the truth unless there's good reason to presume otherwise, especially in relation to a high profile national incident. I don't think there's any shame in the fact they haven't identified the perpetrators yet. It's obviously very difficult once you understand the issues involved.

Nobody has managed to get a clear photo so far, AFAIK. Many of the intrusions were at night and the drones had lights attached: presumably to make them more obvious but then all you can really see is the light.

They also get fined if they land with too little fuel.

Yes, that’s fine when it’s just one aircraft wanting to divert. The problem when Gatwick or Heathrow shut suddenly is that lots of aircraft at once want to fly to their alternate, which may or may not be able to accept them. They all have to find a diversion airfield that can accept them, and then be individually coordinated and re-routed by ATC, which takes time and fuel that you weren’t planning to burn.

Ah yes, sorry hadn't considered that level of knock on effect. If 30 flights have Stansted as an alternate, Stansted can't accept all of them.

Maybe these 'drones' were actually alien spaceships but the authorities don't want to say that in case everyone panics.

Don't panic.

Flights suspended again at Gatwick due to drone activity according to the BBC.

The inevitable occurs.

If no-one is caught and jailed for the last two days, there’s gonna be a plague of copycats.

Can't really argue with any of that.
FWIW my (favourite) niece is a police officer, as is her husband, both stationed at Brixton.
I get to hear some eye-opening things.... which neither should (probably) share with me.

This doesn't surprise me. They've had some rest.