Copenhagen airport closure due to reported drone activity

[jarlrmai]

Airpord

I'm trying to understand where you got this.


You produced an enhanced frame from the video, by using a color correcting tool and then producing a "trailing echo" of images... using 8 frames? I assume the echo effect is useful in that the "trailing echo" it produces for each star image increases the number of pixels in each image; so that the image of each star is more recognizable (?)

And you then overlaid an image from Stellarium?


I did a Google search for "Levels + Echo (8 frames, Max)"

I got this "AI Overview." Is this accurate?

Mick tends to use Adobe After Effects's echo effect:

https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/after-effects/using/time-effects.html

Essentially it's used to stack frames together to get dimmer objects to show up, and using the video effect saves time extracting all the frames and aligning and combining them and is good enough for analysis purposes.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

That's great. The best result I can get is this...

I used VLC to capture a single frame from the video, and used ACDSee Photo Studio to optimize contrast and exposure. I eyeballed everything, including the best frame to capture. I did my best to avoid filling the image with compression artifacts.

There's not a single other star visible.

I've got an "eye" I've developed through thousands of hours of experience... but it seems the artist's eye is obsolete. It's kind of taking the fun out of the process...


MW's technique is good, but the presentation is lacking. I'd like a step by step work flow explanation that anyone here could understand. Including a first time visitor. I'm still not sure exactly what he did and what the finished image is.

Frankly there was too much of a "Trust me, Bro" vibe.

 

[Trailblazer]

...BTW the plane 50km away is slightly lower in real life than in Sitrec. Is that because of refraction ?

I wonder if the cause is the way altitudes are reported? At higher altitudes (above the transition altitude) planes report pressure altitudes based on a "standard atmosphere". Below the transition, the altitude is reported based on the local barometric pressure.

If the local barometric pressure is lower than standard pressure (and/or the "thickness" is lower due to colder air), then a plane reporting (say) FL250 will actually be less than 25,000 feet above the ground.

ADSB Exchange offers different KML downloads, using either barometric or GPS altitudes.

Edit: I'm not sure this would account for it in this case as I just checked and all the planes were well below the transition altitude. At 18:27:20 the reported barometric and GPS altitudes were, from nearest to furthest:

2175ft / 2700ft
3800ft / 4325ft
5925ft / 6550ft
8150ft / 8700ft

So all of them were actually somewhat higher than the barometric altitude suggests, by around 500ft (but varying amounts).

Maybe you could try repeating the video using the other options and see how it affects the view? I must admit I am not quite sure what the "baro + avg" option actually means.

 

[jarlrmai]

That's great. The best result I can get is this...
View attachment 84570

I used VLC to capture a single frame from the video, and used ACDSee Photo Studio to optimize contrast and exposure. I eyeballed everything, including the best frame to capture. I did my best to avoid filling the image with compression artifacts.

There's not a single other star visible.

I've got an "eye" I've developed through thousands of hours of experience... but it seems the artist's eye is obsolete. It's kind of taking the fun out of the process...


MW's technique is good, but the presentation is lacking. I'd like a step by step work flow explanation that anyone here could understand. Including a first time visitor. I'm still not sure exactly what he did and what the finished image is.

Frankly there was too much of a "Trust me, Bro" vibe.

If it helps I added it to Sitrec, the echo shows which objects are persistent, ie are 'real' (stars) and not random noise which gets bought up by the levels increase.

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?cu...com/11433/Copenhagen metro/20250929_092150.js

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

Yes, that helps tremendously.

The left most frame shows a map of the observer's position and the direction the camera was pointed. The red line indicates the center of the frame (the direction the camera was pointed), the blue lines indicate the edges of the frame. Everything we see in the video is between the two lines.

The middle frame is an enhanced version of the video. This enhanced version shows stars in the sky.

The right frame is a map of the night sky produced by the Sitrec program. Much like Stellarium would produce. This map shows the night sky as it would appear to a camera pointed in the direction indicated by the map in the left frame.



The finished product is an overlay of a still frame from the enhanced video and the map of the night sky. (The image of the map is superimposed over the video frame.)

The dots in the video and the stars in the sky map match up perfectly.

Thus proving that the "Drone" is really the star Betelgeuse.


If I've got anything wrong, please tell me.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

And BTW, Betelgeuse is scintillating. Anyone at all familiar with the sky should know, through life experience, what a bright scintillating star looks like. You'd think.

This is an example of "sky shock." The stars have been there, but the witness has never looked at them. When motivated to look at the sky, the witness is shocked by the weird things she sees.


The old argument from UFOlogists goes something like this:

These witnesses are adults (and solid citizens) who have been living under the sky all their life. They would know what a star looks like. Therefore this UFO could not have been a star. Checkmate, Mr. Smartypants Skeptic.


What this kind of thing really proves is that people are shockingly oblivious, incurious and unobservant.

 

[jarlrmai]

Star comparison lines added

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

In 2017, back when the dinosaurs roamed the Earth, we had to do things the hard way. Like this:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/un...tar-in-southern-sweden-2011.9224/#post-214654

I had to resort to pulling an actual Book off the shelf. (Book? What's that?) It was harder but the challenge was more rewarding, I have to say.

I'm still chagrined that I didn't recognize that asterism of Taurus right away. I was rusty.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

the echo shows which objects are persistent, ie are 'real' (stars) and not random noise which gets bought up by the levels increase.

Tell me more...

 

[jarlrmai]

Tell me more...

When the camera moves the echo effect persists them, if they draw lines that match the camera movement they are fixed real points in the scene, not just noise.

 

[Mendel]

Edit: I'm not sure this would account for it in this case as I just checked and all the planes were well below the transition altitude. At 18:27:20 the reported barometric and GPS altitudes were, from nearest to furthest:

2175ft / 2700ft
3800ft / 4325ft
5925ft / 6550ft
8150ft / 8700ft

So all of them were actually somewhat higher than the barometric altitude suggests, by around 500ft (but varying amounts).

Transition altitude at Copenhagen is 5000ft.

(But like you said, that's probably not it.)
I think aircraft on approach may switch to QNH sooner.

 

[gargamel]

I am watching the big press conference that the Danes have arranged. It's all "we must be vigilant", "this is our new reality" but upon a direct question they say "we don't have an answer for what they are"...

TBH it sounds like they know by now it was a nothingburger but it's a bit difficult to back down from it just like that. Or perhaps they know 99% of it was nothing but there is some minor detail about some obs that still needs to be clarified, so they're technically not lying or anything.

 

[jarlrmai]

In America, during the NJ flap it never went as far as the ruling leaders making direct accusations against nations, a few fringe (at the time) local pols did, Biden was in power during it and it sort faded as expected as nothing continued to happen the weather and daylight changed and Trump came to dominate the news cycle, of course true believers hang on and will be re-invigorated by this flap.

There was never any serious reality of it being a nation state because it was taking place on the continental US, in northern Europe, Russia is slightly more realistic here, but there's still 0 evidence presented but "serious words" have been said and are hard to take back.

The US officials under Biden did eventually release a statement which basically said it was mostly (read all) normal aircraft and even Trump's gov (after promising to get to the bottom of it) put out a fairly garbled statement that seemed imply 'FAA approved drones', but probably (charitably) was just badly paraphrased and not wanting to repeat exactly what Biden's gov had said which is basically that everything that flew did so with FAA regulations adhered to and was therefore probably just normal planes etc.

There's going to be a truth gap where the politicians failed to walk it back with enough clarity and timeliness for it to have any impact and the conpsiracies will take hold.

 

[Ann K]

One of my friends at university did her PhD thesis on non-stereoptic depth cues and I realised that I unconsciously use such methods, eg moving my head from side to side to generate parallax.

Outside my window, squirrels (creatures whose eyes are close together) often move their heads or entire upper bodies from side to side. I didn't know why, but gaining depth perception by that method makes sense, especially if you want to travel from branch to branch.

 

[JMartJr]

n America, during the NJ flap it never went as far as the ruling leaders making direct accusations against nations, a few fringe (at the time) local pols did,

A quibble: The Iranian mother ship nonsense came from congressman Jeff Van Drew. A member of congress possibly does not qualitfy as a "ruling leader," but is more than a "local pol."

 

[ThomasH]

I am watching the big press conference that the Danes have arranged. It's all "we must be vigilant", "this is our new reality" but upon a direct question they say "we don't have an answer for what they are"...

TBH it sounds like they know by now it was a nothingburger but it's a bit difficult to back down from it just like that. Or perhaps they know 99% of it was nothing but there is some minor detail about some obs that still needs to be clarified, so they're technically not lying or anything.

Remember, this so-called Prime Minister of ours is known for loving crises, situations where she can present herself as the only one who can save us!
She's already used the COVID trick, claiming that other parties can't criticise her because "this is such an important matter" and they must understand she needs to "concentrate." To her, critical members of parliament are "Putin-friendly." In my opinion, she's a true psychopath.

She gave a speech about the drones, saying "attack" five times in the first 25 seconds. I couldn't watch any more. It's all fear, fear, fear - a great way to control people…

But the conclusion from the press conference is:

• It is unclear where the drones came from.
• It is unclear where they flew.
• It is unclear who was behind them.
• It is unclear how many there were.
• It is unclear what type of drones they were.
  

 

[Mendel]

But the conclusion from the press conference is:

Fear the unknown!

 

[ThomasH]

Fear the unknown!

It doesn't matter what you fear, just live in fear then we will take care of you ...maybe remove some freedom rights etc., but it's for your own good.
This is working really well.

 

[gargamel]

I am largely unaware of Danish internal politics, even though I live nextdoors and visit often. But yeah, the concluding remarks of today's presser does give me a bad/dishonest vibe.

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

I am watching the big press conference that the Danes have arranged. It's all "we must be vigilant", "this is our new reality" but upon a direct question they say "we don't have an answer for what they are"...

TBH it sounds like they know by now it was a nothingburger but it's a bit difficult to back down from it just like that. Or perhaps they know 99% of it was nothing but there is some minor detail about some obs that still needs to be clarified, so they're technically not lying or anything.

The fearmongering and escalatory warmongering language we are seeing is bad. But to me this also suggests that actually the Danish government/military is not working with a bunch of high quality classified information that proves there are these unidentified drones flying around. Whenever we bring up the lack of evidence (or actually, that the evidence overwhelmingly proves the opposite of what is being alleged), there are people who will say oh well government/military/intel officials said something is happening, so they must have high quality sensor evidence and it's just secret so no one can see it. That's one possibility and I'm sure is true in some situations, but another possibility in situations like this is that there actually is not a bunch of secret military evidence, but rather the military and defense officials are just echoing "reports" they heard that were bubbled up the chain without much rigor or skepticism applied prior to them stating it publicly on the record.

And military/police employees may be contributing some visual reports of their own, which adds to the problem. This is what happened when individuals on a US Coast Guard ship off the coast of New Jersey in Dec 2024 reportedly saw several dozen large drones flying in from over the ocean. This one report was more credible to government officials because while it matched other reports from random members of the public and had the same kind of evidence (descriptions and videos that looked a lot like normal airplane traffic), it was from people in the armed forces, so automatically more credible. Officials start talking about it all over Congress and on TV as if this had been proven to have occurred. The docs linked below show that there were videos included in the report, but you never heard members of Congress saying hey we should analyze the evidence first before jumping to conclusions. The fact that analysis trended towards concluding the people on the ship actually misidentified airplanes was never reported on. The government never made it known. This was only obtained via FOIA, months later.
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/drones-over-new-jersey.13770/post-350696

This is a frequent problem where initial stories of weird/amazing/anomalous things happening get spread all around but follow-up information runs contrary and creates doubt that any of that actually happened get spread less. As another example from the New Jersey hysteria last year, the TSA had done multiple investigations into some sightings of anomalous drones which were reported on in the news, and the TSA investigations came to the conclusion that the sightings were misidentified conventional airplane/helicopter traffic. This was never published publicly. A FOIA managed to get ahold of those documents, 5 months later. Some teams in the government knew things that were contrary to what was being publicized, and none of these things involve classified information, yet it was never published. Government officials who echoed stories about drones hovering over a nuclear power plant never got corrected. There was just no follow-up. So what can the general public do other than assume those stories were true?
https://www.metabunk.org/threads/drones-over-new-jersey.13770/page-18#post-344584

 

[ThomasH]

I am largely unaware of Danish internal politics, even though I live nextdoors and visit often. But yeah, the concluding remarks of today's presser does give me a bad/dishonest vibe.

I guess the other side will say it's not true, so let's leave politics out of the forum - I just needed it out

Yes it's clear they don't have good photos, radar data or other, so my fear is, that it's just eye witnesses - the same kind who has misidentified planes and stars for a week.

 

[gargamel]

I guess the other side will say it's not true, so let's leave politics out of the forum - I just needed it out

Yes it's clear they don't have good photos, radar data or other, so my fear is, that it's just eye witnesses - the same kind who has misidentified planes and stars for a week.

To be fair I think Swedish ditto are largely a farce anyway, though I do follow it, to the extent my sanity allows. Our PM has issued a flurry of objectively stupid statements over the past couple of days as well.

But yep, they supposedly still got nothing solid that they can disclose to the public and this is a two-fold issue because it seems more certain by the hour that it was a indeed a case of mass hysteria*, and as long as they haven't figured out a way to back down and at the same time save face, all the nutters out there will get more fuel on their fires.

Big UFO/UAP-profiles are having a field day with these vague remarks as it is. "Of course you don't know what they are, they're out of this world" etc.

*Kickstarted by the one "anomalous" observation, the taxi plane. It was anomalous, they hadn't flown like that before, as somebody dug up. The 2nd was the police Eurocopter, and then it went bananas.

 

[Ian Ridpath]

But the conclusion from the press conference is:

• It is unclear where the drones came from.
• It is unclear where they flew.
• It is unclear who was behind them.
• It is unclear how many there were.
• It is unclear what type of drones they were.

And it is unclear whether there were any drones at all. Same as at Gatwick back in 2018 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gatwick_Airport_drone_incident

 

[gargamel]

Gotta mention that there were two actual drones (consumer variety, the DJI kind of thing) in Norway during this "flap" that are routinely by media conflated with the far more nebulous Danish (and Swedish) stuff.

One was sent up by two Singaporean tourists in central Oslo, not near any airport or anything, but in a restricted flight zone, by the Opera. They were immediately identified and fined by Norwegian police.

One day later a Norwegian man in his 50s was caught flying a drone near Gardemoen airport outside Oslo. Again, they tracked it down in an instant and caught the guy red-handed so to speak.

 

[ThomasH]

Once again the Danish media use a picture of a plane* for an article about "mysterious drones".
If real drones had been seen all over the place, wouldn't they have used those pictures?

It's a bit like making an article about Brad Pitt being seen in Copenhagen, and then showing a picture of Eddie Murphy in Odense!!

* Everybody could see this plane over Randers on FlightRadar, even the pilot wrote a message: Sorry for flying my plane over you, and the guy with the video posted it and said ok, it's debunked.

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

Once again the Danish media use a picture of a plane* for an article about "mysterious drones".
If real drones had been seen all over the place, wouldn't they have used those pictures?

It's a bit like making an article about Brad Pitt being seen in Copenhagen, and then showing a picture of Eddie Murphy in Odense!!

* Everybody could see this plane over Randers on FlightRadar, even the pilot wrote a message: Sorry for flying my plane over you, and the guy with the video posted it and said ok, it's debunked.

This really is playing out exactly like the mass hysteria in New Jersey last year, but now Denmark is getting their version of it. Clips get stripped of context or any corrections made, and circulated around, forever, as false evidence. Media companies put a clip like this into a folder called "mysterious drones" and they just reuse it over and over again in their reporting. They either don't know or don't care that it isn't a drone. The exact same thing happened in the US with media companies, particularly NewsNation and NBC, doing this same thing with airplane videos from New Jersey.

 

[ThomasH]

This really is playing out exactly like the mass hysteria in New Jersey last year, but now Denmark is getting their version of it. Clips get stripped of context or any corrections made, and circulated around, forever, as false evidence. Media companies put a clip like this into a folder called "mysterious drones" and they just reuse it over and over again in their reporting. They either don't know or don't care that it isn't a drone. The exact same thing happened in the US with media companies, particularly NewsNation and NBC, doing this same thing with airplane videos from New Jersey.

Exactly. The "normal" Dane now thinks, Russian mysterious drones are circling everywhere, because the media keeps reinforcing the narrative.

 

[JMartJr]

Everybody could see this plane over Randers on FlightRadar, even the pilot wrote a message: Sorry for flying my plane over you, and the guy with the video posted it and said ok, it's debunked.

Can you share a source for that? Would be useful.

 

[Mendel]

Can you share a source for that? Would be useful.

see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/co...-to-reported-drone-activity.14455/post-353135

 

[ThomasH]

see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/co...-to-reported-drone-activity.14455/post-353135

Yup.

 

[Ravi]

Exactly. The "normal" Dane now thinks, Russian mysterious drones are circling everywhere, because the media keeps reinforcing the narrative.

It is I think not limited to Danish news.. I am Dutch and our news outlets act similarly. Heck, they even closed one lane of Schiphol a few nights ago, which turned out to be a balloon.
But yeah, also here all these same headlines "we must be ready for a Russian drone invasion!!1!", or along those lines.

 

[JMartJr]

Can you share a source for that? Would be useful.

see https://www.metabunk.org/threads/co...-to-reported-drone-activity.14455/post-353135

The bit I am after is the pilot saying it was my plane, and the witness agreeing. Looks like part of that might be here

But I can't read it because I am only about 1.25 lingual, and the .25 comes from High School Spanish...

 

[jarlrmai]

Google translation:

Hi Lasse, sorry if you were startled by my flight last night! It is otherwise very normal for us to "practice" dark flying at this time of year.

 

[ThomasH]

Oh I've got news
...have to make a video before I break it here.
I talked to a guy in the airport.....

 

[jdog]

This really is playing out exactly like the mass hysteria in New Jersey last year, but now Denmark is getting their version of it. Clips get stripped of context or any corrections made, and circulated around, forever, as false evidence. Media companies put a clip like this into a folder called "mysterious drones" and they just reuse it over and over again in their reporting. They either don't know or don't care that it isn't a drone. The exact same thing happened in the US with media companies, particularly NewsNation and NBC, doing this same thing with airplane videos from New Jersey.

And then the narrative becomes that the drones must be invisible to radar, have no heat signature, make no noise, can't be followed to their destinations, can't be shot down -- so must be advanced adversary technology (that the Russians aren't using in Ukraine for some reason) or aliens.

Drone technology so advanced it's like they're not even there.

 

[TinFoilHat]

And then the narrative becomes that the drones must be invisible to radar, have no heat signature, make no noise, can't be followed to their destinations, can't be shot down -- so must be advanced adversary technology (that the Russians aren't using in Ukraine for some reason) or aliens.

Drone technology so advanced it's like they're not even there.

Poland says it shot down Russian drones after airspace violation - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c...ttps://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c147065pzdzo

Poland shot down drones and it one of them crashed into a house.

 

[jdog]

Poland says it shot down Russian drones after airspace violation - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c147065pzdzo#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=17592495430366&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c147065pzdzo

Poland shot down drones and it one of them crashed into a house.

Russian Gerbera decoy drones made of plastic and plywood detected crossing the border from Russia on radar, shot down with air-to-air missiles and aircraft cannon, and then recovered.

I'm not sure why Russia would be saving its best stealth drone technology to haunt the battlements of Denmark.

 

[gargamel]

Oh I've got news
...have to make a video before I break it here.
I talked to a guy in the airport.....

I am intrigued!

Poland says it shot down Russian drones after airspace violation - https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c147065pzdzo#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=17592495430366&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c147065pzdzo

Poland shot down drones and it one of them crashed into a house.

Those drones were the regular Shahed/Geran/Gerbera kind of suicide drones that fly over Ukraine in the hundreds every day. Easily spotted, tracked and targeted, and indeed shot down. Completely different characteristics from these alleged ones over Denmark and Sweden.

Though the house damage was caused not by a crashed drone but by a Polish AA missile:
https://www.pravda.com.ua/eng/news/2025/09/16/7531126/index.amp

And I am not even particularly certain that the Polish incursion was intended, I am leaning towards it having been caused by EW (jamming), but that's a different story altogether, and there is already a huge thread about what's going down over there.

 

[ThomasH]

I found the spot where one of the CPH "drones" was filmed! And it matches 100% with the famous little plane that flew over 10 minutes before the shutdown!

Source: https://youtu.be/b3o3S6S5Gt8


What are the odds? An airport staff filmed what he thought was a drone, right before a real Russian drone was there and was reported by the airport.

 

[Kyle Ferriter]

@ThomasH this is great. Have you also looked at the other clip within the TV2 video, filmed from a slightly different location near the terminals? I would guess filmed by the same person within a few minutes, potentially of the other pass by that plane.

https://tv2.dk/reel/2025-09-23-her-ses-droner-i-luften-over-koebenhavns-lufthavn-6379962402112