A 38-year-old man has been charged with flying a drone next to Heathrow airport without permission of air traffic control on 24th December (just three days after Gatwick reopened). He will appear in court on Tuesday.
Man charged
- Thread starter African wildlife
- Start date
people like this give drone jockeys a bad name, no wonder everyone gets upset when they see a drone. I saw reactions on FB when someone took aerial photos of a windmill from just in side a nature park which according to the Dutch government flying map is clear to fly (not even a natura2000 area which needs you ask permission) He made some great photos and was attacked and told he can't do it blah blah.
Not clear if this is the same man that played havoc at Gatwick, but I'd guess the police are checking to see if his cellphone was pinged near Gatwick at the time the sightings are reported to have taken place. If he's the one behind Gatwick as well he's in deep doodoo...
Brian
Brian
Here's a more reputable source: Heathrow: Man charged with flying drone near airport
If the person charged is guilty then he would have to be a serious level of stupid to fly near a airport let alone after the chaos at Gatwick.
BBC states he was from Hillingdon so not only is he close to Heathrow but also RAF Northolt
If the person charged is guilty then he would have to be a serious level of stupid to fly near a airport let alone after the chaos at Gatwick.
BBC states he was from Hillingdon so not only is he close to Heathrow but also RAF Northolt
"Nobody has yet been charged with either the Gatwick incident last month or the Heathrow incident earlier this month, Rusu is not connected with either incident."
Unfortunately, there are some who intentionally ignore safe flying guidelines. Then there are those who seem oblivious to safety issues, guidelines or regulations. For that reason, I would like to see a geo-fence on all consumer drones. The fence might be very tight (60' altitude, 200' range) if the operator did not register the drone or get any remote pilot license. There could be multiple licensing levels with larger geo-fences for higher levels of tested qualifications. In this case, those who show the discipline and effort to push for higher qualifications get awarded more latitude in their flying freedom.
I think we do not need more restrictions or geo-fences. We have adequate regulations. What we DO NEED is enforcement of the restrictions we have with extreme penalties for those that fly recklessly near air traffic endangering life and property.
I think it's relevant when it comes to creating and maintaining public hysteria over drones / quadcopters.
The model plane is technically a UAV (unmanned aerial vehicle) but it isn't a drone so why report it as either?
It should have been reported for what it was, a man has been arrested for flying a cheap model plane in a park half a mile away from an airport.
I don't necessarily feel sorry for him as such and the judge was probably right to brand him as 'stupid' in as much at least that it was a bad idea to be seen with a transmitter anywhere near an airport after all the recent alleged drone sightings and mass hysteria due to news reports.
My issue is with news outlets intentionally misleading the masses, they all had the facts that it was a model plane from the start but all referred to a 'drone' flying close to a runway of a major airport. That conjures a very different image of the reality of what actually happened, it certainly wouldn't have made a story a couple of months ago (and probably wouldn't have made a story at all without inserting 'drone' in there).
Also, if we are now calling all model aircraft 'drone's we can expect a lot of drone sightings around airports from now on! Of course, they will likely be full sized manned aircraft that just look like UAVs because they are far away
My issue is with news outlets intentionally misleading the masses, they all had the facts that it was a model plane from the start but all referred to a 'drone' flying close to a runway of a major airport. That conjures a very different image of the reality of what actually happened, it certainly wouldn't have made a story a couple of months ago (and probably wouldn't have made a story at all without inserting 'drone' in there).
Also, if we are now calling all model aircraft 'drone's we can expect a lot of drone sightings around airports from now on! Of course, they will likely be full sized manned aircraft that just look like UAVs because they are far away
Do you envision a higher earned qualification that would permit non VLOS flight?
Yeah another great money spinner for local governments. More people die or cause accidents in cars than with drones yet a simple car license allows you to driver a super powered sports car at over 200km/h if you choose to break the law. Are we going to only allow people to drive 45km/h cars until they pass an higher test? My drone is for fun so I do not wish to have to pay loads on unnecessary licenses and other rubbish. If I break the law a hefty fine and loss of my drone will deter me doing it again. You will always have idiots who do stupid things like drive cars with no license so hitting the law abiding drone users because of idiots is not the way forward. Harder fines hurt the guilty but nothing will stop idiots.
Unfortunately the consequences of someone doing some irresponsible, especially near and airport, could be catastrophic so i think there is going to be little tolerance on the part of the general public and legislators if a rash of these types of occurrences should happen or if the unthinkable happens.
Similar threads
