Please elaborate.
The most recent one was a plastic bag from what I remember
So much this. Although from recollection I believe you have blheli on the escs I believe?
Multirotor, multicopter and quadcopter discussion - The Drone thread
- Thread starter RomanNose
- Start date
Please elaborate.
The most recent one was a plastic bag from what I remember
So much this. Although from recollection I believe you have blheli on the escs I believe?
Oh sweet! Thanks for the information guys. They do indeed have BlHeli, now I need to read up on how to alter the software on them!
Tonight I'm going to solder up the ESC's to the motors and then shrink wrap the arms, it's not much, but then I can get working on the body next week. I'm being a bit restricted waiting for parts to arrive. Once the PDB is here, it can all go together.
EDIT: A quick google and I know all I need to about swapping the rotation over... Yea that's easy haha. This hobby is becoming more and more fun and less scary than I first thought the more I delve into it!
Tonight I'm going to solder up the ESC's to the motors and then shrink wrap the arms, it's not much, but then I can get working on the body next week. I'm being a bit restricted waiting for parts to arrive. Once the PDB is here, it can all go together.
EDIT: A quick google and I know all I need to about swapping the rotation over... Yea that's easy haha. This hobby is becoming more and more fun and less scary than I first thought the more I delve into it!
Last edited:
Not really much to elaborate on tbh, the statistics speak for themselves. There were more drone near-miss reports filed in the UK in the first 6 months of 2016 than there was in the whole of 2015.
You do realise reports aren't always correct? The one I mentioned was a report of a near miss...Yet no ones reporting on the fact it wasn't a drone at all.
Again, penalise the people doing it dangerously, leave the ones do it correctly alone...Much like driving a car.
It doesn't matter that not all reports are correct, the fact is that incidents of Drones being too close to commercial aircraft is on the increase.
Your car comparison doesn't really work. People who are driving a car dangerously are usually breaking a law, people flying a drone dangerously aren't necessarily breaking any laws, because the legislation just isn't there.
Take for example controlled airspace around airports. The current rules state that you can fly a drone anywhere inside controlled airspace as long as you are under the weight and height limits, without having to inform anybody. From an ATC point of view, controlled airspace is supposed to be a "known traffic environment". The current drone rules don't really gel with this at all. If ATC is giving a service to a light aircraft flying VFR inside controlled airspace the pilot should expect to be told about all conflicting traffic. Operators of Hot Air Balloons, Gliders, Para-Gliders etc. all need to ask for permission from ATC to fly inside controlled airspace and IMO drone operators should have to too.
Your car comparison doesn't really work. People who are driving a car dangerously are usually breaking a law, people flying a drone dangerously aren't necessarily breaking any laws, because the legislation just isn't there.
Take for example controlled airspace around airports. The current rules state that you can fly a drone anywhere inside controlled airspace as long as you are under the weight and height limits, without having to inform anybody. From an ATC point of view, controlled airspace is supposed to be a "known traffic environment". The current drone rules don't really gel with this at all. If ATC is giving a service to a light aircraft flying VFR inside controlled airspace the pilot should expect to be told about all conflicting traffic. Operators of Hot Air Balloons, Gliders, Para-Gliders etc. all need to ask for permission from ATC to fly inside controlled airspace and IMO drone operators should have to too.
Absolutely they are there. Read the air-navigation order: http://www.caa.co.uk/unmannedaircraft/
Specifically articles 94, 95 and 241.
I have read the ANO extensively, but thanks for the link, lol. I perhaps worded myself incorrectly. What I should've said was the legislation isn't extensive enough to cover all the situations in which a drone can be operated dangerously, as per my example.
So it doesn't matter if half the reports are just people going 'herp derp must be dronezzes'.
Okay.
The problem with the ANO is that historically it has been aimed at aircraft pilots who have had extensive training and are licensed. When the ANO states "A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property" most licensed pilots will have a similar definition of what that entails in reality. However, as any half-wit these days can buy and fly a drone, vague statements like this don't really cut the mustard. The legislation needs locked down with hard rules and not just vague statements.
Which means the other half are genuine. And they are increasing. Which bit of the statement "drone incidents are on the increase" are you having trouble with?
I actually spoke to an airport control member of staff about this in my pub. He works at an airport less than a mile from me. It's a small field strip but very active with single prop private planes.
Which off the topic, the airfield is home to some awesome craft! Including a spitfire!!!
Anyway, I simply asked what he would need from me to fly around, he simply replied with "common sense is all I ask from you, lad".
Whilst I have not read the ANO, I really don't see your argument Neo, have you got any of these said reports? I really don't think people are that stupid to fly over terminal 5 heathrow without any part of them saying "this could be dangerous".
Which off the topic, the airfield is home to some awesome craft! Including a spitfire!!!
Anyway, I simply asked what he would need from me to fly around, he simply replied with "common sense is all I ask from you, lad".
Whilst I have not read the ANO, I really don't see your argument Neo, have you got any of these said reports? I really don't think people are that stupid to fly over terminal 5 heathrow without any part of them saying "this could be dangerous".
You would be surprised. I have seen many reports, however they are not in the public domain so I can't link them.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against drone flying at all, in fact I quite fancy one myself
But the current ANO legislation is just too vague for the general public. Just like driving, if the general public are going to be allowed to operate drones without training or licensing then they need some hard rules and not just vague statements that can be interpreted different ways by different people.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not against drone flying at all, in fact I quite fancy one myself
But the current ANO legislation is just too vague for the general public. Just like driving, if the general public are going to be allowed to operate drones without training or licensing then they need some hard rules and not just vague statements that can be interpreted different ways by different people.
I think I already have. The statement "A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property" is very open to interpretation.
For example, would you fly in an airport control zone? if you did, would you inform them? If you didn't how close to the airport would you get? Would you bother to look up the airfield charts to get an idea of runway orientations? If you did how close to the airport would you get if you were under the approach? 1 mile? 2 miles? 5 miles?
All of these things have no set rules currently.
For example, would you fly in an airport control zone? if you did, would you inform them? If you didn't how close to the airport would you get? Would you bother to look up the airfield charts to get an idea of runway orientations? If you did how close to the airport would you get if you were under the approach? 1 mile? 2 miles? 5 miles?
All of these things have no set rules currently.
Last edited:
You've taken the legislation quote out of context by the way:
241. A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.
This is referring to persons on or around an aircraft. Not with other aircraft. Further to that, as has been said, drones often fall under different rules due to size and weight.
NOT saying you're point is wrong, just that you've misunderstood point 241.
I've not taken it out of context at all. I'm well aware of what the statement refers to. But other than the weight and height limits, and the minimum distance rules, this is the only other rule there is governing every other situation. It just further proves my point, there is no set rules on how close to an airport you can operate a drone, or any differentiation between controlled and uncontrolled airspace.
EDIT:
Actually, reading my post it does kinda look like I've taken the statement out of context. This is not due to a lack of understanding, more to do with my fingers being 2 steps ahead of my brain. I do think the statement, to the general public, is open to interpretation though. A middle-aged sensible guy will have a different idea of what "reckless" means compared to an 18yo NED who just got a drone from his Uncle Jimmy for Christmas.
My second point, which I should not have used as an example for my first point, is just that there is not enough rules concerning the myriad of situations possible.
EDIT:
Actually, reading my post it does kinda look like I've taken the statement out of context. This is not due to a lack of understanding, more to do with my fingers being 2 steps ahead of my brain. I do think the statement, to the general public, is open to interpretation though. A middle-aged sensible guy will have a different idea of what "reckless" means compared to an 18yo NED who just got a drone from his Uncle Jimmy for Christmas.
My second point, which I should not have used as an example for my first point, is just that there is not enough rules concerning the myriad of situations possible.
Last edited:
Off the current topic, took my hand to soldering the motors to the ESC's after I got in from work. I don't normally solder and have only done it for a couple of other projects, so not too bad! The main lesson I learnt tonight is don't use so much solder to tin the pads! Now I've got ugly blobs on the ESC's haha. All a learning curve!
Anyone with a keen eye will note how anal I've been, and the first to notice will receive an internet cookie haha.
Anyone with a keen eye will note how anal I've been, and the first to notice will receive an internet cookie haha.
The thing is though, it needs to be proportional. If flying ANYTHING within controlled airspace was prohibited then you would technically fall foul of the law by flying your £30 toy drone in your garden.
It looks like the European-wide version of the CAA are in the process of publishing draft rules. They are very prescriptive indeed from what I've read (height limit of 50M, nothing home built of over 250g, mandatory registration of all craft etc etc.)
It looks like the European-wide version of the CAA are in the process of publishing draft rules. They are very prescriptive indeed from what I've read (height limit of 50M, nothing home built of over 250g, mandatory registration of all craft etc etc.)
Agreed
Ive just read the ANO regarding drones linked above. Why can't the weight limit be decreased to account for the type of drones readily available and leave it at that. I don't think anybody would disagree with controlled airspace being just that.
In class F and G airspace you can do what you want within the remaining rules. If I recall correctly, that would account for the majority of UK airspace.
EASA/UK CAA will want to massively overcomplicate this. If the requirement for transponders listed earlier in the thread comes into force, it will effectively legislate the hobby out of existence due to cost.
In class F and G airspace you can do what you want within the remaining rules. If I recall correctly, that would account for the majority of UK airspace.
EASA/UK CAA will want to massively overcomplicate this. If the requirement for transponders listed earlier in the thread comes into force, it will effectively legislate the hobby out of existence due to cost.