Drones over gatwick..

I don't understand how they haven't caught it they have spotters and a helicopter surely it can't be this difficult
 
I do also wonder whether there is a concern the drones contain something dangerous that makes simply shooting them down out of the question?

I just hope the Army will sort this out soon, one way or another.
 
Abyss said:
These articles covers it pretty well:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-drone-laws-bring-added-protection-for-passengers
https://dronesafe.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Dronecode_2018-07-30.pdf

In short new legislation was rushed through in May to restrict the height they can be flown (400 feet) and how close they can be flown to an airport (1km). Maximum penalty is an unlimited fine or 5 years for "recklessly or negligently acting in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft or any person in an aircraft".

The fuller legislation will come into effect in November next year and will include the need to register heavier drones and take an online test.

I actively fly drones and fully support the need for appropriate legislation
Click to expand...

I would hazard a guess that a lot of people, myself emphatically included, will read the penultimate sentence in your post, and think why do we need to wait until November 2019 for fuller legislation, why wasn’t it placed on the statute books when drones first came into being?
Quite a few more, myself definitely included, will read your final sentence, and wonder why you weren’t satisfied with flying kites, and instead, went into drones.
Maybe I’m missing something, but to a degree, I can understand those who operate remotely controlled model ships on a pond, or cars around a circuit, but having seeen the occasional news story regarding “near misses” with planes, culminating in this bizarre fiasco around Gatwick, where for whatever reason, the operator seems to have got away undetected, I would have thought that those that play with theses things, were held in low regard.
 
Secret_Window said:
I do also wonder whether there is a concern the drones contain something dangerous that makes simply shooting them down out of the question?

I just hope the Army will sort this out soon, one way or another.
Click to expand...
The very act of shooting them down is dangerous - you miss and the round has to go somewhere, you hit and it passes through and the round has to go somewhere, you hit and it doesn't pass through, and you're potentially liable for the drone falling on someone.

Given how small even professional drones are, how they move etc and the fact that at the moment it seems that whoever is flying it is keeping it away from the police etc, you're looking at a situation where anyone taking a shot at it is more likely to miss than hit, which isn't good when you're using ammunition that is capable of doing the job from a distance, in an area with a lot of people within the potential range of the round.
Not to mention the risks to things like the parked up aircraft, fuel trucks etc from stray rounds.
 
"andy" said:
They say they don't want stray bullets. Cant they harpoon it or something. Maybe A big spud cannon :p

Embarrassing that this hasn't been solved all day
Click to expand...

Or a CODA

9gEkvVp.jpg
 
mattx2 said:
I don't understand how they haven't caught it they have spotters and a helicopter surely it can't be this difficult
Click to expand...

There's 20 acres on plan to monitor for a little tiny drone flying around. The likelihood of being in the right place at the right time with the right equipment is slim.
 
Jean-F said:
I would hazard a guess that a lot of people, myself emphatically included, will read the penultimate sentence in your post, and think why do we need to wait until November 2019 for fuller legislation, why wasn’t it placed on the statute books when drones first came into being?
Quite a few more, myself definitely included, will read your final sentence, and wonder why you weren’t satisfied with flying kites, and instead, went into drones.
Maybe I’m missing something, but to a degree, I can understand those who operate remotely controlled model ships on a pond, or cars around a circuit, but having seeen the occasional news story regarding “near misses” with planes, culminating in this bizarre fiasco around Gatwick, where for whatever reason, the operator seems to have got away undetected, I would have thought that those that play with theses things, were held in low regard.
Click to expand...

Technology always leads legislation. Laws are complex, and unless you want to strangle enterprise, you have to let technology progress and legislate on the way.
Drones have hundreds of uses that massively reduce cost, risk and time taken to do certain jobs.
Think of surveying a chimney stack with a drone versus hiring a modern Fred Dibnah. It costs a mere fraction of what a man and scaffolding would cost. It's much safer, and it could be done in a matter of hours rather than days or weeks using a drone.
 
For efficiency you swing big props slowly. Seems someone in the thread recognises the drone as a DJI. The BMW driver of the drone world, always being a dick, just because :p
 
Jean-F said:
I would hazard a guess that a lot of people, myself emphatically included, will read the penultimate sentence in your post, and think why do we need to wait until November 2019 for fuller legislation, why wasn’t it placed on the statute books when drones first came into being?
Quite a few more, myself definitely included, will read your final sentence, and wonder why you weren’t satisfied with flying kites, and instead, went into drones.
Maybe I’m missing something, but to a degree, I can understand those who operate remotely controlled model ships on a pond, or cars around a circuit, but having seeen the occasional news story regarding “near misses” with planes, culminating in this bizarre fiasco around Gatwick, where for whatever reason, the operator seems to have got away undetected, I would have thought that those that play with theses things, were held in low regard.
Click to expand...
What an odd post. Why would flying a drone be held in less regard than any other RC vehicle?

Most of those "near misses" were far from it and that's if they even were drones.

As said above, there are tons of current and future uses for them far beyond any other RC vehicle.

Very much looking forward to getting mine at Christmas!
 
Bigpops said:
Technology always leads legislation. Laws are complex, and unless you want to strangle enterprise, you have to let technology progress and legislate on the way.
Drones have hundreds of uses that massively reduce cost, risk and time taken to do certain jobs.
Think of surveying a chimney stack with a drone versus hiring a modern Fred Dibnah. It costs a mere fraction of what a man and scaffolding would cost. It's much safer, and it could be done in a matter of hours rather than days or weeks using a drone.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the input Bigpops, I really should have thought of technology leading legislation, and your analogy of chimney stack and Fred Dibnah versus using a drone is right on the ball.
There has been mention on here, and on TV of 5 year max sentences for flying drones near airports or planes.
I wasn’t directly affected by the goings on at Gatwick today, but if and when they find the cretin responsible, I’d like to see his head on a spike, on London Bridge.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom