Welcome to PhantomPilots.com

Sign up for a weekly email of the latest drone news & information

BEFORE WE LOSE OUR HOBBY ALL UAV PILOTS READ THIS

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Sparko, Dec 19, 2014.

  1. Sparko

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Have just sent this publication which could affect all UK UAV Pilots in the future if some pilots don't stop doing unlawful flying as described by the CAA .

    Unfortunately the three page pdf file is not allowed on this site, which is a shame as their is very important laws which may be coming our way, if admin read this perhaps they will allow a word document instead,meanwhile as a work around I have pasted a link here from another forum http://www.djiguys.com/Forum/viewtopic. ... a0c1904135

    ARPAS wants more regulations, more prosecutions, licensing of all pilots and all aircraft to be registered. Have your say!

    ARPAS are pushing for more regulations, a mandatory licence and more prosecutions of recreational drone pilots.

    They've written to the House of Lords (here: http://bit.ly/1zIkOyD) and they will issue a joint statement with BALPA on Monday morning saying "more must be done to keep our skies safe for the future" and calling for licencing of all pilots.

    We at FPV UK (http://www.fpvuk.org) disagree. We think that education (at the point of sale, in the media, on YouTube, on Facebook, etc) plus geo-fencing (around airports) is the answer (and we've implemented those measures with the manufacturers and distributors).

    ARPAS are doing a survey on whether their proposed more onerous rules is the right approach. Please take a minute and fill in the ARPAS survey with your thoughts on this issue here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/G9C56WC
     
  2. Sparko

    Joined:
    May 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    I thought this article might have provoke some debated discussion at least, especially as some reckless uav pilots have been in the press recently flying close to full size aircraft and high profile buildings, football pitches with large crowds of spectators, over towns, busy roads, the list goes on, and not just the UK they are worldwide, legislators are just waiting for a fatal accident to happen then see what happens to our hobby then, surely its better to fly safely and withing the law to preserve our hobby.
     
  3. locoworks

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2014
    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    10
    I cant understand why they would pick on just drones? the electronics are out there to enable a normal heli to have gps hold and return home features and cameras and FPV in fixed wing stuff. just going for multi rotors wont stop what they want to stop.
     
  4. wildpalms

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    They are not just picking on multirotors. There is no such thing as a drone in any technical definition here in the UK. It seems to be a wonderful media term to make them seem less nerdy that model airplanes.

    Here in the UK we have Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems and Unmanned Aircraft Systems. For the purposes of one guidance document they use the term 'model aircraft' to refer to any SUAS or UAS that is flown for sport or recreation. This applies to my helicopters, multirotors, F3A models, gliders etc. The level of technology and automation installed makes no difference.
     
  5. Hughie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    140
    Location:
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Well as long as it is a level playing field, and the same rules are applied to everyone.

    It will be interesting in the next few days to see all the children flying their new Hubsan X4Cs in their back gardens, each just the size of a computer mouse, who should all be prosecuted for flying a <7kg SUSA within 150m of a village.
     
  6. noiseboy72

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2014
    Messages:
    575
    Likes Received:
    17
    Location:
    Lincs, UK
    I don't disagree with anything the ARPAS says. I do think they overstate the safety case and the situation of thousands of dangerous pilots out there. The chances of a quadcopter actually hitting and causing damage to even a light aircraft is really very small.

    The established model aviation clubs have a role to play here as well. I approached my local club and they simply did not want to know. Their response was that as the original DJI remote did not have a trainer socket and I would have to learn to fly it on manual and pass the helicopter test on manual before I would be allowed to fly at the club site unassisted. Although I partly understand their stance, they make no allowances for the fact that these machines are easier to fly by a factor of at least 10 and the level of training required much less to fly safely. I also fly CP and FP helicopters and trust me, the controls might be the same, but that's about the only similarity between flying techniques.

    Anyway, I digress. We do need to educate the public about these machines, but the Daily Mail and Jeremy Vine show on Radio 2 are doing a fine job of this anyway. The weekly scare stories are better than any education the CAA can do.

    I think there needs to be a differentiation between a P2V or P2 and Go Pro and an X4C. I'm not quite sure where the cut off should be, as there a few machines that fall between these 2 extremes. How about a sub 500g "Park Flyer" category, which can be flown as a toy, with a small camera or basic FPV and outside of some of the rules. Maybe a 25M from all other persons and buildings restriction - or within the limits of your own property? A badly thrown Frisbee would be much more dangerous than this.

    I think the issue will be short lived, as the uneducated will probably crash and destroy their quad quite quickly and lose interest. A few high profile and expensive convictions will also help as well.
     
  7. Hughie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2014
    Messages:
    1,477
    Likes Received:
    140
    Location:
    Leeds, United Kingdom
    Noiseboy72, nice post. I agree with all of that.

    I think the (CAA) rules as they are are not too bad. The trouble is they need to stack up for every weight class and if they dont then people wont stick to the rules. So I agree we are really missing a "toy" weight class for tiny r/c aircraft with its own set of rules. Why should I bust a gut to fly my P2 outside a 150m line when other sub 7kg are not. Well if some of them weigh 200g and are the size of an apple then they probably should not, but they should have some category rules too, and having a camera on board should be taken into account (25M for example as you say sounds reasonable).

    I too find the local flying clubs a bit sniffy about RTF quads. I do get it to some extent, I used to fly fixed wing years ago, and I found them harder to fly than real gliders. There is a real skill to it which takes ages to master. However I am dissapointed at the clicky snobbery I have experienced from them when I pitch up to fly with a Phantom.