A passenger aircraft had a narrow miss with an unidentified object over Glasgow, a report has revealed.
The Airbus A320 was making its final approach to Glasgow Airport on 2 December when an object passed about 300ft underneath it.
The pilot of the aircraft said the risk of collision with the object, which did not show up on radar, had been “high”.
A report by the UK Airprox Board said investigators were unable to establish what the object had been.
Here is part of the transcript:
A320: “Er not quite sure what it was but it definitely er quite large [1255:40] and it’s blue and yellow”
EGPF: “OK that’s understood er do you have a an estimate for the height”
A320: “Maybe er [1255:50] yeah we were probably about erm four hundred to five hundred feet above it so it’s probably about three and a half thousand feet.”
So, it appeared to have been “blue and yellow or silver in colour with a small frontal area, but “bigger than a balloon”.”
Blue and yellow?
Nah, that couldn’t be it. It didn’t show up on radar. And he would have a flight plan and clearance. Also, it does not seem the description fit.
Now, this is interesting because it could have been LOTS of different things. There are many possibilities. But because all those possibilities have not been disconfirmed, we can’t jump to a conclusion and say a known (spaceship) from an unknown (UFO). Was this a hazard to the craft? We don’t know, we don’t know what it was. Note that the pilot was on approach and kind of busy. He was not paying attention to anything much else so the observational details are not very reliable. Check out this episode of Strange Frequency Radio where Robert Sheaffer talks about just such things.
Also, check out the Board report here (PDF) and see how busy things are in the sky.
Members were of the opinion that, in the absence of a primary radar return, it was unlikely that the untraced ac was a fixed-wing or rotary-wing ac or man-carrying balloon. It was considered that a meteorological balloon would be radar significant and unlikely to be released in the area of the Airprox. A glider could not be discounted but it was felt unlikely that one would be operating in that area, both due to the constrained airspace and the lack of thermal activity due to the low temperature. Similarly, The Board considered that a hang-glider or para-motor would be radar significant and that conditions precluded them, as they did para-gliders or parascenders. Members were unable to reach a conclusion as to a likely candidate for the conflicting ac and it was therefore felt that the Board had insufficient information to determine a Cause or Risk.
Tip: Bob Blaskiewicz