0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


Nick Flint

Droning on----- (or not?)
« on: May 03, 2019, 5:25 pm »

Being a member of the model aircraft flying club, I've been sent this rather concerning news that our dear (beloved) government appear to have found something they MUST do - and that is to limit model aircraft flyers operations, with draconian possibly non reversible control.
Following on from the rediculous chaos resulting from ONE illegal (CRIMINAL) airport drone activity that closed airports down, the government has decided to HIT the good guys, citing the bad guys. (MY WORDS ONLY)
Should a 10 mph speed limit be imposed in urban areas because of yobs / criminals driving at 80mph through the streets?
I am mindful that this forum should remain a politically free zone, BUT--- what we perhaps see here is similar to Dept of Transports handling of our beleaguered pastime.
IMHO- THIS is a jerk reaction (pun intended) to cover over the obvious failings of the airport security in sitting around until they are caught off guard by such "fairly obvious" anti social astonishingly dangerous acts. Reports of drones flying next to the wings of landing passenger jets (about 150MPH???) are stupid (to say the least)
Droners (and subsequently perhaps Hovercrafters) are likely and obvious targets for "authorities" to flex their muscles, as all major parties seem (at the moment) to fail in all other matters.
Clearly,  IF/When this stuff becomes law it will affect drone coverage of our sport, if not also hover crafting.
The CAA already does legally control drone flying airport activity. MY drone (DJI) cannot be flown operated or flown to endanger planes. It is programmed by DJI manufacturers, so my onboard telemetry can be used AGAINST me --- and I am DELIGHTED it does, and can.
We will see. :-X




UK Model Flyers - Call to action
Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT

John Robertson

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #1 on: May 03, 2019, 10:51 pm »
Not good - have you read the consultation doc?  There are two issues here - firstly the need for regulation based on alleged disruption to Gatwick (no hard evidence has been produced to support what is simply an assertion backed by media histrionics), secondly the costs assigned to the registration scheme which seem to have simply been imagined by some bureaucrat!  Examples include the annual maintenance cost of £1M which is utterly ridiculous for basic database software running on a web server with only 170000 entries (THIS website can handle in excess of 1 MILLION users and the software is FREE!).  Then the software "upgrade" costs of £0.95m pa - It looks like someone just made these number up to justify the excessive registration fee (ten times what you'd pay for a drivers licence).

And then, who is going to register and use the scheme - why bother as the odds of being "caught" are somewhere between zero and negligible!  There is absolutely zero benefit to those paying the annual fee - that is the fundamental flaw in the scheme design and is likely to make the uptake very small.  ultimately the scheme will do absolutely  nothing to deter any "alleged" criminality.

Nick Flint

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #2 on: May 04, 2019, 9:08 am »
ALERT politicians may let us down.
                                                                     You have been warned.
Oooor----"THEY" could--->
1 Catch drone operators -  huge fine with imprisonment for knowingly endangering a whole aircrafts occupants and the people on the ground as it crashes, and/or
2 Prevent drone electronics working around airports and flight paths. It should happen BOTH ENDS of the equation (IF they want to stop it?)--- My craft is manufactured to PREVENT -not restrict airport flying, and sends my craft telemetry to DJI to be used to help prosecute ME) -----GOOD....
Government should do like wise from THEIR end by their counter measures


It is worth noting that frustrated politicians (ALL parties) can and will act suddenly against minorities to perhaps show they aren't TOTALLY incompetent?  ::)
Government/ Authority "toleration" and past dialog can turn into absolute clamp downs.


If you fly hovercraft, microlight, or drone, or canoe or walk in SSRs or own a dog, or fish  --- watch out..
Usual disclaimers including (but not limited to) etc--- IMHO    ;)



Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT

Ronnie L

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #3 on: May 04, 2019, 9:10 am »
Same old story with the government and rule makers.
They make rules and good people comply.
The people that cause problems before the rules donít give a #### and carry on to cause the same problems.
Spoiling it for good people and not solving anything.
Rule makers are just doing it to be seen to be doing something.
Typical bloody politicians......utterly useless.

Warby

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2019, 1:05 pm »

Nick Flint

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #5 on: May 05, 2019, 9:00 pm »
Looks unlikely my drone will be used to film after Loch Fyne and Lochcarron.
Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT

Al

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #6 on: May 05, 2019, 10:01 pm »
I'm in favour of drone regulation.  There is very little if anything in the above link that should cause any problems for a legitimate and safety conscious drone user.  Model flyers have been regulated for years and has posed very little in the way pf problems.  The biggest problem usually being related to noise. 


As John mentioned, the lawful drone users will jump through hoops to stay within the law, but there will be an element that wont comply and these will spoil it for every one.  There is always someone no matter what the sport/past time
 

Nick Flint

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #7 on: May 06, 2019, 9:20 am »
Im also in favour of "balanced" regulation. Delighted I have always been registered, and trained, and culpable/liable.  Regulation was already in position but as ever is ignored by criminal behaviour. Thats what make makes them criminals!
Lowering the speed limit in built up areas to 10 mph would not affect the criminals driving at  80 mph, it but makes it seem "cooler" for them.
Push bikes and their riders weigh about 70-90 kilos total. THEY are uninsured, unregulated and untaxed, riding for free (not really- we tax payers DO buy their roads!). If I was hit by one of those doing 30 mph (easily achievable even on the flat) then I would probably DIE.
My drone weighs 1400 Grams with a top speed of about 30 mph, bicycles are allowed to operate unregulated, regularly exceeding the 30mph going down into my city!


What I am unhappy with is the fact that NON of the Gov proposed "counter drone measures" will actually STOP a repeat of Gatwick and other airports and passengers being endangered and financially affected.
Not one of their measures will stop it happening again.
In my mind---- its simply "wrongly targeted".  :-[
Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT

John Robertson

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #8 on: May 06, 2019, 11:28 am »
Regulation has always been in place for drones (and other RC craft) - the difference with this is it's a criminally-prosecutable compulsory registration scheme that does little or nothing to improve the behaviour or safety of the sport - it's very obvious to me that it is a political knee-jerk reaction to whipped-up media hysteria (and, again, I come back to the evidence-free  "Gatwick" incident).  You need look no further than the "consultation" for the legislation - a wholly inadequate six weeks timed to happen over the summer holiday period (August 2018) when no-one would notice!

Nick Flint

Re: Droning on----- (or not?)
« Reply #9 on: May 23, 2019, 6:44 pm »
OOOoooh some good news (at last) on using drones to record our cruises, and club life.
Ive been in discussions with my other club-  British Model Flying Association, ref dronage, and future legislationis not onerous at all (it "appears")
1. In November, its "most likely" that operators will have to fill in a Government test ONLINE and thats basically IT! Woop (eeeeeee).  :D Ironically any certification one has via our BMFA is not usable!!!!. Perhaps they consider the BMFA is not as good as them? ??? ?
2. I was primarily concerned that footage taken closer than 50 metres, would be visual PROOF of my wrongdoing!
My concerns ref taking drone footage of our fellow craft operators is exempt because---- the 50 metre non closure aspect is PURELY for people who are "NOT under my control"
THIS MEANS if all operatives sign to say they KNOW of and ACCEPT my drone operations and filming/picture taking, then it is acceptable for me to record and make my usual YouTube films.
I will draw up a suitable thing to sign and at least in the short term matters are released from the strangle hold that seemed to enclasp recording our fun times. Please think and share any ideas you would like to see included. I hope to record quite a few "standard shots" so please engage with me regarding inclusion.
NB we are especially short of "non sev type" craft clips so turn up and I will film!  8)
Make up will be optional, but budgets are strained so payment for inclusion will be £0 (both ways)
Double on Sundays.  ;)
Memories are BETTER than Dreams---"Capn" FLINT