Admission that Falcon Shield and Skyperion were deployed 20/12/18 at Gatwick - why was the airport closed for several hours leading into the 21st and again on the 21st?

Mae'r ymateb i'r cais hwn yn hwyr iawn. Yn ôl y gyfraith, ym mhob amgylchiad, dylai Department for Transport fod wedi ymateb erbyn hyn. (manylion). Gallwch gwyno drwy yn gofyn am adolygiad mewnol.

Dear Department for Transport,

Leonardo a C-UAS vendor has admitted its presence with Falcon Shield and the presence of Metis Aerospace Skyperion at Gatwick in 2018. Given these facts have been made public they ought to be up for discussion.

https://uk.leonardocompany.com/en/news-a...

Leonardo admit a number of points, that they were deployed on the 20/12/18 (day 2 of the Gatwick incident), that no drone was ever detected while they were present and also that Gatwick airport with Sussex Police flew drones to test the systems would detect a drone and go on to state that the tests were successful, i.e. the drone detection systems worked.

Can the DfT explain why when the systems were deployed on the 20th and appeared to be active that evening, why the airport was closed over night from a visual sighting when the C-UAS showed there was no drone present?

Was it doubt in the systems without having run tests first, if so (with hindsight) should tests not simply have been performed on the evening of the 20th allowing normal operations to commence sooner? Or was this a decision that was taken by the airport without input from the DfT?

Given the systems were active on the 20th and tested successfully can it now be reasonably concluded that the sighting on the 21st was a flawed visual sighting?

Given the fact the vendor has made this public record, for the sake of transparent FOI interaction can the DfT finally admit these systems were present rather than having to FOI using the names of systems then requesting e-mails which adds a workload for us both that seems daft?

Yours faithfully,

I Hudson

Department for Transport

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your request for information which
has been allocated reference number P0019842.

A response will be issued to you in due course.

Regards,

Department for Transport
FOI Advice Team

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir

Dear Department for Transport,

Thank you for allocation FOI reference P0019842.

Just as an addendum to the FOI, Metis Aerospace have also themselves blogged on their presence at Gatwick in 2018, https://metisaerospace.com/2019/08/14/ga... meanwhile Chess Dynamics have blogged they even signed a contract for AUDS (apparently now AUDS+ including Skyperion) on the 21st December.

https://www.chess-dynamics.com/news/ches...
https://www.chess-dynamics.com/news/ches...

So there's an across the board publication of Gatwick matters now in the public domain by the private sector and by Gatwick Airport themselves by providing quotes for the companies involved.

Yours faithfully,

I Hudson

Dear Department for Transport,

Regards P0019842 to aid answering this as an FOI, I'll word it more specifically as follows:

According to the DfT records were the services of the following companies sought at Gatwick in 2018 by the DfT or partner agencies and if so is the cost of utilising the services of these companies recorded by the DfT:
Metis Aeroscape
Leonardo

Yours faithfully,

I Hudson

Gadawodd I Hudson anodiad ()

Since making this request the blog by Metis appears to have vanished, as a precaution prior to submitting this FOI the page was backed up to archive.org to prevent evidence mysteriously vanishing.

The backup can be viewed here: https://web.archive.org/web/202101190228...

Gadawodd I Hudson anodiad ()

I've reworded this FOI slightly as the DfT tried to sidestep the Freedom of Information Act and tried to suggest this FOI wasn't asking a question.

I am clearly asking why the airport didn't reopen on the 20th when the DfT were overseeing the Gatwick situation and given the DfT were managing the Gatwick incident you'd think this may well have been discussed on email.

I have however reworded this request to simplify matters.

You can see the attempt to fob off this FOI here: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/g...

Gadawodd J Flynn anodiad ()

You need to reword it again or send your query via another route. The FOIA only covers requests for recorded information - emails, documents, images etc. It does not cover queries, general questions, views, requests for updates, commentary, opinions or information that happens to be in someone's head. You are asking "why", and that's not an FOI.

Department for Transport

Dear Sir,

I am writing to acknowledge receipt of your request for information which
has been allocated reference number P0019999.

A response will be issued to you in due course.

Regards,

Department for Transport
FOI Advice Team

dangos adrannau a ddyfynnir