Lakenheath Nov 22, 2024, Drone filmed from Helicopter

Mick West

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
1763668269619.png


Sadly only a single rather boring frame, but the story is more impressive.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15306077/police-helicopter-UFO-encounter-US-airbase.html

External Quote:
'They were forced to take emergency evasive action in relation to a drone which came within a dangerously close proximity to them,' said an incident log from Suffolk Police, recounting a debrief of the chopper pilots.
...
The incident was largely written off when the UK Airprox Board, the official body that investigates mid-air near misses, published a report concluding that the 'drones' seen by the NPAS crew were actually the lights of a US Air Force F-15 Eagle jet.

Radar data cited in the report showed the chopper and jet coming within 1,700ft of each other. But the report said nothing else unknown was picked up on radar.

Trained British meteorologist Stuart Onyeche, who works for a defense company and has researched the incident, told the Daily Mail that he believes the fighter jet and police chopper were both pursuing the advanced drones.

'I'm inclined to trust the initial detail and assessment of the experienced helicopter pilots that we see noted in these logs, which was that they were forced to take evasive action due to the close proximity of some kind of unmanned drone,' Onyeche said.

The report is pretty detailed and delves into contributing factors.
2025-11-20_12-00-15.jpg

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/upl..._report_files/2024/Airprox Report 2024294.pdf
External Quote:
Concluding their discussion, members summarised their thoughts. Members acknowledged that, with the absence of any indication to the contrary, the pilot of the EC135 had believed that they had been witnessing drone activity. Members appreciated that the incident had occurred at night, without good spatial clues and without the aid of a Night Vision Device. Some members, therefore, had some sympathy with the EC135 pilot in that they had believed that they had seen a drone, on a parallel or converging course, and had been concerned for the safety of their aircraft. However, after analysis, it was clear to members that the track of the F15 had correlated with the perceived position of the 'drone' and that they had actually sighted a fast-moving object at distance rather than a small object moving in close proximity. Members noted from the radar replay that the vertical separation had been significant and were satisfied that there had not been a risk of collision.
The Daily Mail article also quote from a Police Log, that was released under FOIA, but they don't link to it
1763669024082.png
 

Attachments

SmartSelect_20251120-213853_Samsung Notes.jpg

The helicopter crew reported a vertical distance of 200ft when it was actually 1700 ft.

They noticed the red flashing strobe, but not the other navigation lights.

The TCAS on the helicopter did not display the fighter, even though the investigators expected that. My guess is that the flight paths were never converging, and thus the TCAS did not select the F-15 for inclusion on the display.
 
I imagine a police helicopters flight path is not as predictable as an airliner how does TCAS account for that?
 
It seems like the only new thing here is the frame from the video. There was a similar story from the BBC, April4, 2025, with some skeptical discussion:

Article:
Ian Hudson, a drone commentator and analyst, extracted data from the flight tracking website ADS-B Exchange.

He said it showed G-POLJ taking off from North Weald Airfield, in Essex, at 21:13 GMT on 22 November. It arrived at RAF Lakenheath 23 minutes later before turning southwest towards Newmarket.

The chopper then climbed steeply before making a series of turns.

The BBC was able to reproduce his findings.

The flight path "appears to be a search or pursuit over Newmarket", and there were reservations within the drone community about the presence of drones in the skies above the airbases, Mr Hudson said.

"There is scepticism about drone sightings at night as often there are mis-identifications," he added.


1763674435508.png
 
@UAV Hive has done a lot of looking into this helicopter incident, and related claims of anomalous drone sightings at Lakenheath and the other two airbases. The article mentions, for example, a member of the public having called the police to report seeing drones from their house.

For this particular helicopter incident, the counterargument against the investigative report after the fact that suggested that there were miscommunications and the helicopter pilot mistook a fighter jet as being a much smaller and closer drone, basically boils down to "but the helicopter pilot said it was a drone".
External Quote:
A UK military source, who has viewed the entire 30-minute video captured by the chopper's infrared camera, said there was more to the incident than a close brush with a fighter jet.

'In the 30-minute video with pilot audio, nobody mentions F-15s,' the source said.

'They only talk about the drones. How they're basically mirroring the helicopter's movements. How fast the drones are going. That they're basically forcing them out of the area.'

The source added that the footage shows one object pursuing the craft performing maneuvers impossible for a fighter jet.

'A fixed-wing craft is caught on the video, where you can see a corkscrew move,' the insider said. 'An F-15 cannot make a small corkscrew turn like that.'
[...]
'I'm inclined to trust the initial detail and assessment of the experienced helicopter pilots that we see noted in these logs, which was that they were forced to take evasive action due to the close proximity of some kind of unmanned drone,' Onyeche said.
(edit: clarification in case the section I omitted above made it unclear, Onyeche is not the anonymous military source. At least he is not named as being them.)

It's odd to remark that the helicopter pilot never mentioned an F15, as evidence for the F15 not being relevant to what the helicopter pilot saw, in the direction the helicopter pilot was looking, at the time the F15 flew towards and made a pretty close pass over the helicopter. To me that would actually be evidence that the helicopter pilot was not aware that they were seeing an F15, or that there was an F15 there.

104012179-15306077-image-a-8_1763570211157.png

This looks like camera bearing 4º. Camera azimuth 79º. So, helicopter bearing 285º ?. Time 2025-11-22 21:47:25Z.

Helicopter bearing of 285º looks about right from the ADSB Exchange MLAT track (the computed MLAT heading shown by ADSB Exchange is completely wrong, but you can see from the path). So that means the camera is looking north, just west of Mildenhall and Lakenheath bases. Arrow below is an approximation.
Screenshot 2025-11-21 at 12.17.03 AM.png


The article frustratingly includes barely any of the material they have access to. Only a single frame of video, and a severely cropped down version of event log. Chris Sharp's coauthor posted a thread with a longer view of the log (but still very limited), and a video clip they received from an unnamed UK military insider source, which is an extremely close-up handheld phone recording of a computer display playing the original video. The clip is 9 seconds, out of an allegedly 30 minute video. None of the on-screen data components are visible.

Source: https://x.com/JoshTBoswell/status/1991572587621826587

G6N9e2bbQAAlGQf.jpeg



Assuming a similar northward viewing direction as in the single frame above, these 9 seconds of video, to me, seem entirely consistent with an aircraft seen head-on in the direction of the Lakenheath area, flying a counterclockwise arc towards the viewer. Which incidentally, is exactly what the radar diagram below shows the F-15 doing at 21:50-51 as the helicopter is on a similar-ish heading (more like 270 than 285).
Mick West said:
The report is pretty detailed and delves into contributing factors.
2025-11-20_12-00-15.jpg
Click to expand...

Immediately after 21:51 and this close pass with the F15, the EC135 helicopter takes off south away from the direction the F15 approached from, briefly pauses, and then makes its way further south back to its base. The longer log Boswell posted marks the helicopter announcing it was leaving to return to base at 21:58. But 21:58 is when they are already maybe like a third of the way back to the base. It also says the UK National Police Air Service base commander for North Weald was onboard the helicopter. If the F15 continued on something like the arc in the radar diagram, it could have appeared to be following the helicopter because it actually kind of was for maybe another minute. Also if the helicopter was significantly misjudging the distance, that would contribute to them thinking the other aircraft was mirroring their motion and following them. Within a couple minutes it would be miles away from the F15 (though the F15 is not on ADSB Exchange, so can't say).

So, Daily Mail (coauthored by Chris Sharp who usually publishes in his own UFO outlet Liberation Times) received FOIAed documents about this helicopter incident and other incidents during those few weeks, but have neglected to publish them. They also have an insider source who is willing to leak 9 seconds of a 30 minute long video to them, in an extremely degraded form, and they are willing to publish this leak. I think if you're going to leak a video, you might as well leak the whole thing, to be honest. Not leak a little basically unusable fragment. I think this is a bad practice. UFO activists intentionally withholding data for cases they say they want people to take seriously, happens a lot.
 
Last edited:
I was also thinking it would odd for the source to say the video shows a small corkscrew turn maneuver that is impossible for an F15 to do, and then provide a leaked portion of the video that doesn't include that maneuver. Maybe they think these 9 seconds show this maneuver?
 
1763722891861.png
Click to expand...

Date 22 Nov 2024 - 9.47pm ...

1763722956188.png
Click to expand...

As a local resident (ish) and an aviation enthusiast who is quite familiar with USAF training operations and transits over East Anglia I'd say that it is very unlikely that an F-15 would have been flying out of RAF Lakenheath at 9.47pm on a Friday night.
 
I believe Ian Hudson is Metabunk User @UAV Hive ....

1763723549499.png
Click to expand...

Ian Hudsons FOIA Request
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/freedom_of_information_request_f_1063

Dear Ministry of Defence,

Subject: Freedom of Information Request - Follow-On to FOI2025/15428: Investigation into Alleged Drone Sightings near RAF Lakenheath and Related Matters

Please refer this request, which is made under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 2000, to the Counter Terrorism & UK Operations Directorate. This is a follow-on to my previous request referenced FOI2025/15428.

First, I would like to express my gratitude for the transparency provided in your response to FOI2025/15428 regarding the false positives that occurred as part of the alleged drone sightings near RAF Lakenheath. Your confirmation that some reported sightings of uncrewed aerial systems (UAS) were identified as military or civilian aircraft, vessels, stars, satellites, and other innocent aerial entities is a positive step towards public understanding.

While the drone industry is well aware that many—in fact, most—alleged drone sightings at night are false positives, this understanding has not been grasped by some UK authorities, such as the Department for Transport. Drones are typically not sufficiently lit to be visible at night; they would generally be heard before being seen, and data from the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has shown that drones are rarely flown at night or in adverse weather conditions. For context, the FAA's analysis of nearly a year of drone flight data supports this, indicating low nocturnal activity.

I do not wish to delve into operational details of the ongoing investigation by the Ministry of Defence (MOD) Police, as I respect the need to avoid prejudicing it. My aim is simply to clarify matters of public interest related to this incident, particularly to prevent unwarranted alarm or reputational damage to the drone sector.

It is important to note the precedent set by the Gatwick incident in December 2018 (Operation Trebor), which was initially attributed to drones but, through subsequent FOIA disclosures, has yielded no substantive evidence of such activity. FOIA responses have revealed concerns raised by Home Office and Department for Transport staff about the lack of evidence and its poor quality. The only video evidence held was denied to exist when queried by the Parliamentary Defence Committee and once uncovered by FOIA it was found to depict Sussex Police's own drone. No culprit or definitive drone evidence was ever identified, leading many (including the drone industry) to conclude there may have been no drones at all, with sightings potentially due to misidentifications during nighttime hours.

In the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) case EA/2023/0272 (arising from ICO Decision Notice IC-193121-Z5F4), which considered a large volume of Gatwick drone FOIA evidence, the tribunal concluded: "The Tribunal found there had been damage to the drone community which is not a small community taking into account the number of professional and amateur drone users, the contribution of drones to the economy and the number of jobs involved in the industry." This highlights the significant public interest in ensuring transparency to avoid similar harm.

To help avoid a repeat of the damage caused by Operation Trebor to the reputation of drones and the industry, and in light of the public interest in accurate information about these sightings (which occurred primarily between 20-27 November 2024, with some extending into mid-December), I would like to ask the following questions under FOIA:

1) Is the Counter Terrorism & UK Operations Directorate conducting its own investigation into the alleged drone sightings near RAF Lakenheath (and related bases such as RAF Mildenhall and RAF Feltwell), or is the investigation solely under the remit of the MOD Police? If both are involved, please provide a brief description of the division of responsibilities, without prejudicing the investigation.

2) Without seeking details that could prejudice the ongoing investigation, does the MOD hold ANY credible evidence of malicious drone activity related to these sightings? For clarity, "credible malicious drone evidence" means:
a) A clear photo or video captured by electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR), CCTV, or professional camera equipment (noting that lights recorded on camera phones are almost certainly not drones, as per industry expertise and the NPAS incident example).
b) Confirmation from more than one counter-drone sensor, such as radar and radio frequency (RF) detection, providing confidence that a drone was present.
c) Clear evidence of a drone on video from daylight hours.
This question can be answered simply with a yes/no for each sub-point, so as not to reveal sensitive details.
3) If the answer to any part of question 2 is "yes," please provide some information, redacted as necessary to avoid exemptions under sections such as 24 (national security), 26 (defence), or 30 (investigations).
4) If the answer to all parts of question 2 is "no," please summarise the nature of the evidence held (e.g., witness statements, potentially flawed sightings with eyes, or other data) or provide a fair explanation of why such a summary cannot be disclosed at this time, including any applicable exemptions and public interest test considerations.

Yours faithfully,

I Hudson
Click to expand...

Reply from the UK MoD

1763723363678.png
1763723381090.png
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

To knock this on the head, UKAB have already investigated and the helicopter was chasing an F-15, it's case closed. I've been involved in investigating this from day 1, I've mainly used the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to quiz the National Police Air Service (NPAS) but I've also utilised the press office a few times as well, I guess I got away with that as I publish FOIA information to X and have a relatively large following for drones in the UK.

The NPAS crew were tasked by Suffolk Police, the way the UK works is that NPAS work as police unit providing aircraft across the UK and then the local police forces request their assets as and when needed to assist with specific incidents. All the crew likely knew was Suffolk Police had reported it as fact that drones were flying at Lakenheath, what they likely never were aware of, was a normal member of the public had called in a sighting and as we know any old light gets reported as a drone. (That reminds me I will have to FOIA the description).

To add to that the MOD have been clear (I brought Metabunk/sitrec to their attention BTW) that the investigation has found mistakes and that's all they've confirmed, Chris Sharp is aware of that as I've tagged him on X on many an occasion. We know that the UAP scene, is the UAP scene and some people (usually Americans) in that scene often focus on data that's since been clarified or debunked.

As an FYI I've just provided my views on X to the Daily Mail. Next year I should have some FOIA outcomes to provide more data on this incident:

Source: https://x.com/UAVHive/status/1992266605863035310


I am not as good as people on here analysing ADS-B from the ground, so generally leave that to you lot, I am however, very good at FOIA so I'll pass on what I find here as well...
MOD FOIA.jpeg
 
I did a rough recreation using the helicopter ADSB data, the top down image with three timestamped positions, and the FLIR camera frame at 21:47:25.

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/1/Lakenheath recreating F16/20251122_202407.js

I first made a path with the three points. Nothing special. I then extended this path backward and adjusted laterally to get a position for the F16 that matched the heading seen in the video.
2025-11-22_13-10-02.jpg


This gives us a four minute recreation. At the start, we see the F-15 barely moving, seemingly slowly moving east at the time of the screenshot, as the leftward (westward) motion matches that of the helicopter. Then the chopper does a U-turn to the east and it looks like F-15 stops in mid air and then reverse direction.

For a couple of minutes it looks like it's moving west, gradually speeding up. Then at 21:49:30 the chopper does a turn back to the east and the F-15 looks like it slows down again, as they are now both moving west. About 30 seconds later the F-15 is now cuving to the east and it looks like it flies up and over the chopper and down the other side.

But really it's all in level flight, at constant speed, with just smooth turns. 2000 feet above the chopper.

Now I have audio in Sitrec it would be great to get some ATC to sync with this. And video.
 
Mick West said:
For a couple of minutes it looks like it's moving west, gradually speeding up. Then at 21:49:30 the chopper does a turn back to the east and the F-15 looks like it slows down again, as they are now both moving west. About 30 seconds later the F-15 is now cuving to the east and it looks like it flies up and over the chopper and down the other side.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind though that this is assuming the F-15 was going in a straight line before the known positions. We don't actually know what it did, so the actual motion could vary quite a bit.

The full video would answer a lot of questions.
 
flarkey said:
Pretty sure on the MX series of turrets that those symbols mean horizontal elevation 4º, and relative azimuth 079º so (285º+079º=004º) North is close to the LOS.
Click to expand...
To clarify what is happening on the overlay:
The 04 degrees up and 079 degrees AZ (middle left on the overlay) are the mechanical mount directions. This is the angle relative to the aircraft orientation, so, not very useful for plotting on a map.
The 285 degrees (in the bottom left of the overlay) is the aircraft heading - its direction of travel.
You cant see it clearly, but the target heading is 004 degrees. This is confirmed by the North pointer only being slightly left of vertical. This being the same as the Elevation of 4 degrees is just coincidental. You can derive it from 285 + 79 = 364 (wrap around every 360 degrees means 4 degrees from true north).
The time has no UTC offset, so its Zulutime/Greenwich mean time. Possibly correct, for UK operation, but daylight saving still needs to be taken into account.
 
Last edited:
UAV Hive said:
I managed to get the full 20+ minutes of NPAS video and a copy is now with Mick.
Click to expand...
Thank you for your work on getting this!

The next question would be why the military source who leaked a short clip to the DailyMail believed this showed something making a maneuver impossible for a fighter jet. And why, with the clip they were given from this (but did not release), did Chris Sharp and Josh Boswell believe the imagery corroborated this narrative? Perhaps they were not thinking about how perspective would make a curve like that shown in the investigative report look in 2D video?
 
Mick West said:
It seems fairly consistent with the F-15 flying towards them while turning to the East. Maybe seems a bit more east than shown on the map - but I suspect that's not an actual data based curve.
Click to expand...
I take that back. The diagram seems to match the radar-based image from the report. Here I've overlaid it. The small dots are from the radar.
1765950832783.png
2025-12-16_21-51-45.jpg


Unfortunately, this part of the encounter is not shown in the video - at least not in any useful way.

The clip I posted above is from 21:46:26 to 21:47:32, a bit over three minutes before the CPA (Closest Point of Approach) shown in the diagram. The F-15 does not seems to be visible in that part of the video. There's one moving dot briefly visible on the right, but that does not seem consistent with the F-15

In the video, they are looking just a bit east of North at 21:50:46. The F-15 would be off-frame to the left at that point. So we don't have a good correlation between the video and the radar data at that point.
 
Last edited:
Kyle Ferriter said:
Thank you for your work on getting this!

The next question would be why the military source who leaked a short clip to the DailyMail believed this showed something making a maneuver impossible for a fighter jet.
Click to expand...
I think there possibly never was a source of the video, the DM report didn't show video but a still which they made out was exclusive, it wasn't, I'd seen it and so had the BBC many weeks before. We were asked not to share it as it was due to used in a UAP book.

That video doesn't for a moment suggest anything mysterious, what it does do though is show there were no drones over Lakenheath...
 
Mick West said:
I take that back. The diagram seems to match the radar-based image from the report. Here I've overlaid it. The small dots are from the radar.
View attachment 87154View attachment 87157

Unfortunately, this part of the encounter is not shown in the video - at least not in any useful way.

The clip I posted above is from 21:46:26 to 21:47:32, a bit over three minutes before the CPA (Closest Point of Approach) shown in the diagram. The F-15 does not seems to be visible in that part of the video. There's one moving dot briefly visible on the right, but that does not seem consistent with the F-15

In the video, they are looking just a bit east of North at 21:50:46. The F-15 would be off-frame to the left at that point. So we don't have a good correlation between the video and the radar data at that point.
Click to expand...
There was a fair bit of civilian aircraft traffic over Newmarket that evening, as I did think there was potentially an airliner caught in one of the pan arounds so it would be worth checking if sense can be made of where the EO/IR was pointing at particular points.
 
The helicopter I assume is UKP013 the track for that is on ADSB Ex took off from near Epping at ~21:14

There seems to be nothing close north of it on ADSBX at the time given in the video for the sighting

Does anyone if the azimuth on the camera overlay is ownship relative or actual degrees from N?
 
Given the Airprox text notes a number of times there were 2x F-15 jets it's potentially possible the first right hand side dot was the 2nd F-15 albeit it seems remiss not to have added its path to the map?

"It occurred to members that the Lakenheath Approach controller may not have deduced that the EC135 pilot's references to 'drones' had correlated to the position of two F15s that had been in the area"

If that sounds viable I can always pose the question to UKAB albeit they wouldn't have to answer.
 
I overlaid the map of the F15 path in google maps
Got the approx co-ordinate for each point
Assumed F070 is flight level 70 (~7000 feet 2133 metres)
Interpolated the speed assuming constant speed (radar returns seem fairly regular)
Then made a CSV that is importable into Sitrec

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/11433/F15 Lakenheath/20251218_095318.js

date,lat,lon,alt
2024-11-22T21:50:06,52.316890,0.409437,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:08,52.313741,0.408066,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:12,52.308597,0.407382,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:17,52.302824,0.407386,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:21,52.297576,0.407561,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:26,52.291593,0.409452,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:29,52.286450,0.412372,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:33,52.281832,0.415463,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:37,52.276689,0.420269,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:41,52.272281,0.425931,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:46,52.267978,0.432278,2133.6
 

Attachments

Last edited:
In my 15years experience of watching Lakenheath F-15s fly overhead at night the most obvious thing to identfy them as an F15 is the red strobe on the tail. In contrast the F-35s tend to have bright white strobes on their wingtips.

F-15 takeoff at night (ignore the afterburners and you'll see what I mean)

Source: https://youtube.com/shorts/SAabtDJ0zNQ?si=63BIvW9aa-MxAeQR


I have taken the liberty of updating @jarlrmai 's sitrec with flashing strobes to closely resemble what I would expect an F15 to looklike.

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/15857/F15 Lakenheath/20251218_102403.js

EDIT - Ah sitrec doesnt seem to save bespoke light configurations. :(
EDIT 2- at it saves the strobe intervals but not the strobe colours. <-- @Mick West
1766053469843.png
 
1766054124107.png


It may be possible to approximate the take off and controlled turn transition if we assume it just took off from Lakenheath.
 
I asked AI to try extrapolate back to take off from Lakenheath, it did a fair job I don't think the turn is right, I think it probably flew straighter for longer and then transitioned into a tighter turn

date,lat,lon,alt
2024-11-22T21:48:36,52.416400,0.577600,0.0
2024-11-22T21:48:43,52.410576,0.563458,152.4
2024-11-22T21:48:49,52.404751,0.549316,304.8
2024-11-22T21:48:55,52.398927,0.535174,457.2
2024-11-22T21:49:02,52.393102,0.521032,609.6
2024-11-22T21:49:07,52.387811,0.508927,762.0
2024-11-22T21:49:13,52.382003,0.497031,914.4
2024-11-22T21:49:19,52.375676,0.485346,1066.8
2024-11-22T21:49:25,52.368831,0.473871,1219.2
2024-11-22T21:49:31,52.361469,0.462607,1371.6
2024-11-22T21:49:38,52.353589,0.451552,1524.0
2024-11-22T21:49:44,52.345191,0.440708,1676.4
2024-11-22T21:49:51,52.336275,0.430074,1828.8
2024-11-22T21:49:58,52.326841,0.419650,1981.2
2024-11-22T21:50:06,52.316890,0.409437,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:08,52.313741,0.408066,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:12,52.308597,0.407382,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:17,52.302824,0.407386,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:21,52.297576,0.407561,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:26,52.291593,0.409452,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:29,52.286450,0.412372,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:33,52.281832,0.415463,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:37,52.276689,0.420269,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:41,52.272281,0.425931,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:46,52.267978,0.432278,2133.6
 
Based on this think they probably saw this specific F15 visually, but the FLIR camera is picking up other military planes (potentially incidentally) that we don't have any data for. Maybe they even took off from Lakenheath a few minutes earlier as part of same flight as this later F15
 
Some ground truthing for establishing that everything matches, it would be nice if Sitrec could show the angle relative to the track but I get that helicopters don't always travel forward
1766075533054.png
 
So I think this object fits for a plane flying a similar path to the F15 path we were given just at a slightly different time
1766085333336.png


Unfortunate the time offset for tracks is limited to 60 seconds, so I'd have to manually adjust the time for the new tracks

1766085393746.png
 
jarlrmai said:
Then made a CSV that is importable into Sitrec

https://www.metabunk.org/sitrec/?custom=https://sitrec.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/11433/F15 Lakenheath/20251218_095318.js

date,lat,lon,alt
2024-11-22T21:50:06,52.316890,0.409437,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:08,52.313741,0.408066,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:12,52.308597,0.407382,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:17,52.302824,0.407386,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:21,52.297576,0.407561,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:26,52.291593,0.409452,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:29,52.286450,0.412372,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:33,52.281832,0.415463,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:37,52.276689,0.420269,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:41,52.272281,0.425931,2133.6
2024-11-22T21:50:46,52.267978,0.432278,2133.6
Click to expand...
Bit of an issue here, since there's no time zone indicated, it's loading this in whatever time zone the user is in, so when I look at it it's 8 hours off, and the plane is somewhere near the north pole.

I shall fix this ASAP, but if none-GMT folk look at this now, it will be wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Mick West
Natick "Drone" Sightings, 2024
Replies
20
Views
3K
Trailblazer
Trailblazer
wdejager
Action taken against alleged drones over Volkel air base (the Netherlands)
2
Replies
56
Views
7K
wdejager
wdejager
S
Four unidentified military-style drones breached no-fly zone to target Zelenskyy's arrival in Dublin
2 3
Replies
98
Views
8K
stevewhite
S
gargamel
Gothenburg Landvetter airport closure due to reported drone incursion
2
Replies
48
Views
3K
PennaLinjal
PennaLinjal
Kyle Ferriter
Copenhagen airport closure due to reported drone activity
13 14 15
Replies
599
Views
42K
wdejager
wdejager

Latest posts

Trending content

Back
Top