Multirotor, multicopter and quadcopter discussion - The Drone thread

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-42126150

I suppose this was inevitable, with the explosion in drone ownership, but some of this appears to be duplicate legislation. Why not enforce some of the existing laws already? As ever, I imagine, the responsible owners will do what's required and the irresponsible ones will just ignore it and carry on as before.
 
Yeah, I kinda saw it coming but didn't think they'd be so stupid with it (though not surprised).

Not sure registration/tests will help, as you say it doesn't stop people intentionally breaking the law, it just makes it more difficult for those trying to be law abiding.

One thing I noticed which confuses the hell out of me - this specifically targets 'drones' - but doesn't define a drone - so if you attach a Vector to an RC Plane, you are still safe up to 1000ft? It's all very vague and undefined, and like the US I'm sure it'll go down really well.
 
It's just ridiculous

'a drone flies over passenger jet wing at LONDON GATWICK airport', why in the world was that not picked up? Do they not have patrols or anything? If it's was a dji I'm pretty sure the tower could pick it up?
 
Probably because it didn't happen, imo. The main issue I see is I don't think they're as common as is being made out, BALPA have a hugely negative stance with drones and many of the 'near misses' reported and subsequently sensationalised were later found not to be drones, but birds or carrier bags. But of course those headlines don't get updated or pushed no where near as hard as the originals.
 
I'm sure they could easily build in flying restrictions for the larger drones, either via GPS and restricted areas or even an automatic return to base when the drone is within x meters of an active aircraft (transponder).

Then only those up to no good would disable it and can be dealt with in court.
 
Addicted said:
They could follow the drone to the user - probably 99% chance he's going to land where he took off, aka at his feet.
Click to expand...

I guess, I was going to argue that someone may not fly it back to themselves if they've been caught - but then if they're stupid enough to fly it into an airport then who knows

MonkeyMan said:
I'm sure they could easily build in flying restrictions for the larger drones, either via GPS and restricted areas or even an automatic return to base when the drone is within x meters of an active aircraft (transponder).

Then only those up to no good would disable it and can be dealt with in court.
Click to expand...

The thing is, my 'large' drone (as it weighs more than 250g) has no provision to do any of that.

edit: wait..what

It could also include a ban on drones flying near airports or above 122 metres (400 feet), the government says, and a requirement for drone owners to use apps, rather than simple remote controls, to fly their aircraft, in order to ensure that the rules are always readily accessible and incorporated into the flight plan.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...-bill-police-safety-crackdown-uk-civilian-use
 
Last edited:
GeX said:
edit: wait..what

https://www.theguardian.com/technol...-bill-police-safety-crackdown-uk-civilian-use
Click to expand...

That's the best bit isn't it? :D

Can't wait, mine weighs over 250g and it's only a 220 frame I think. If it gets to get point I'll just build a micro, or use floss frames or something.

The app thing is ridiculous though, so they're going to also penalise all of the manufacturers out there? I GUESS the only thing they could do that I wouldn't be majorly against is do similar to what DJI do, let you use a controller but then have an app on your phone that's connected to the quad, stopping all this stupid behaviour...It would have course piddle off all the racing pilots.
 
Like Bruce Simpson said last week: They really should differentiate between a "drone" and a model aircraft.
Drones being GPS/GLONASS equipped machines that need no prior experience to fly. IE, anything by DJI or similar.
Model aircraft being everything else that doesn't have GPS. Same as it has been for almost a century without a single incident involving a manned flight.

Opening up DJI Go on your phone, and tapping a button to take off / land requires you can read, and pretty much nothing more. We have a guy at my club with a Mavic. He just sends it off on missions and sits watching his iPad screen. It didn't stop him hitting some trees the other week when he underestimated the height of them. Oh how I laughed. Before you ask, he went into them sideways so didn't see them coming and neither did the sensors on board.
 
Bigpops said:
Like Bruce Simpson said last week: They really should differentiate between a "drone" and a model aircraft.
Drones being GPS/GLONASS equipped machines that need no prior experience to fly. IE, anything by DJI or similar.
Model aircraft being everything else that doesn't have GPS. Same as it has been for almost a century without a single incident involving a manned flight.

Opening up DJI Go on your phone, and tapping a button to take off / land requires you can read, and pretty much nothing more. We have a guy at my club with a Mavic. He just sends it off on missions and sits watching his iPad screen. It didn't stop him hitting some trees the other week when he underestimated the height of them. Oh how I laughed. Before you ask, he went into them sideways so didn't see them coming and neither did the sensors on board.
Click to expand...
That’s because the mavic does not have sensors on the side :p. It only has sensors in the front which will warn you but if you are in sport mode, the sensors are switched off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom