I didn't say you had to swallow it, but there is such a thing as reserving judgement. You on the other hand say you "firmly believe there was never a drone at Gatwick". Firmly believe, means you have virtually passed judgement...on the basis of diddly squat, with absolutely no evidence to the contrary. You have zero evidence to say there was no drone. You have zero evidence that there was a drone. And yet you've convinced yourself there wasn't. So, yes, please forgive me if that kind of unconfirmed bias drives me up the wall.
I really don't understand why over the last few years the public feel they have any right to see evidence from an on-going criminal investigation. Seriously, where did that notion come from? It seems now everybody feels entitled to scrutinise the evidence to make up their own mind in advance of any formal prosecution and verdict read out in court.
It's quite simple. It's because the Government seems intent on introducing quite draconian laws based on an element of untruths and hysteria and, quite separate from the final result of any ongoing criminal investigation. The senior Police Officer investigating at Gatwick himself suggested that it was a possiblity there was no drone, before he was re-programmed for being 'off message'. The QinteQ report into drone collisions was staged, so that the javelin shaped object could penetrate a windscreen. The argument didn't stand any scutiny whatsoever, the configuration they chose, a DJI F450, a drone I happen to own, probably could not have left the ground with the overweight battery (10,000 mah!) and then actually reach an aircraft flying at the quoted speed with the strictly weight limited flight duration. We live in a democracy, and if individual rights are to be curtailed, then I expect a proper and balanced assessment by our representatives and nothing less. You also wouldn't be happy if your car was electronically restricted to 50 mph because criminals speed.
I was told three genetically engineered mice escaped from a laboratory and stole a small helicopter. Hence the secrecy. Mass hysteria would break out if the public got wind of the fact there are mice that can fly aircraft. After all, it could be pigs next.
First short flight of the year away from home last week - Mavic 2 Pro.
This is a multi-million redevelopment of a derelict large house into an even bigger house.
From ground level it's remarkably well screened by trees even in winter. ( www.ravenswickhall.com )
I used one when it first came out. Not a bad drone, the picture quality was good and for wi-fi the range was OK, well better than the Mavic Air. Downsides was the app wasn't that good (probably changed by now), it's a small drone but long meaning it seemed to take up more space in the bag and the controller was a bit bulky.
I guess it depends what you want it for, I always recommend the Mavic 2 Pro but that is a fair bit more expensive.
I got the MA for a steal! but really do want for the M2P with that better camera. I'm kinda hoping we will see a revised MA2 in the near future, but not holding out much hope. So saving loose change from the beer fund to pay for an upgrade .
Ideally would have loved a mavic Pro 2 but bit expensive for me so it was between the mavic air and anafi. I went with the anafi and only had a few short flights but over the moon with it! Much prefer it to my phantom 3 advanced and really like the simplicity of the app.