Posts: 21,170 Threads: 581 Likes Received: 8,919 in 6,599 posts Likes Given: 1,425 Joined: Jun 2018 Reputation: 786 Looks like the CAA might be  ing bricks about how many people are actually going to bother registering their drones because they now seem to be trying to publicise a "bonus" service associated with registration that I never even previously heard of called "Drones Reunited" LOL. Details in the link below. What a joke  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-50293106 BBC News Wrote:The mandatory requirement to register covers owners of drones or model aircraft weighing more than 250g (8.8oz). Owners of unregistered drones could then face the threat of a fine.
At the same time, the CAA is starting a service it hopes will reunite owners with their lost drones.
A quarter of owners have lost a drone at some point, CAA research suggests.
Most lost drones go missing because of malfunctions in flight, the research indicates. This includes losing battery power, loss of signal or technology failures.
But a quarter of cases involve pilots making mistakes.
CAA spokesman Jonathan Nicholson said: "Our aim is for the Drones Reunited platform to become an essential service for the drone community - the first port of call for anyone who has lost, or found, a drone."
The CAA said anyone who registered their drone would get free access to the service, which issues each device with a unique identification code. ![[-]](https://intofpv.com/images/collapse.png) • Posts: 668 Threads: 31 Likes Received: 208 in 158 posts Likes Given: 95 Joined: Feb 2019 Reputation: 14 "A quarter of owners have lost a drone at some point, CAA research suggests."
This sentence already throwed me off from even giving some credibility to the rest of the news... Would be nice to know where is this data coming from. • Posts: 21,170 Threads: 581 Likes Received: 8,919 in 6,599 posts Likes Given: 1,425 Joined: Jun 2018 Reputation: 786 (06-Nov-2019, 07:45 AM)Maiden Flight Wrote: "A quarter of owners have lost a drone at some point, CAA research suggests."
This sentence already throwed me off from even giving some credibility to the rest of the news... Would be nice to know where is this data coming from. The same people who spotted the drones at Gatwick told them...so it must be true Unfortunately, now that BBC news article is out in the wild, the registration rules will be common knowledge amongst the general public so they are going to be gunning for us at any opportunity. This is the first bit on news I have seen on any mainstream media channel publicising the fact that drone owners/pilots need to be registered. • Posts: 1,312 Threads: 50 Likes Received: 832 in 504 posts Likes Given: 372 Joined: Jul 2018 Reputation: 51 Well I guess I'll be flying my 5" until the end of the month, then my 3" until the weather clears up next year. Also started working on toothpick. And then we'll see how it shakes out in the spring ...
In other news: I can't see anything about a spotter in there. Has that requirement been removed now? *crosses fingers*
The ground is for dead people. • Posts: 21,170 Threads: 581 Likes Received: 8,919 in 6,599 posts Likes Given: 1,425 Joined: Jun 2018 Reputation: 786 06-Nov-2019, 03:17 PM (This post was last modified: 06-Nov-2019, 04:43 PM by SnowLeopardFPV.) (06-Nov-2019, 10:14 AM)Banelle Wrote: In other news: I can't see anything about a spotter in there. Has that requirement been removed now? *crosses fingers* Unfortunately not. Those rules are baked into Article 94(3) of the existing Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2016 which is current UK legislation and therefore trumps any of this drone registration nonsense. Scroll down and read the paragraphs under the "First Person View" heading on the following web page... https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Recreational-drones/Recreational-drone-flights Even if you only fly your 3" after the 30th November deadline, the fact that you have a flyable 5" (even if it's at home in a box) means you still have to register by the end of the month because it is the owner of such craft that need to register them, not the pilot. As I said in previous threads/posts, even if people register their drones in order to comply with the law, they will likely be breaking another law by flying FPV without a spotter. So to comply with the registration laws but then fly FPV by themselves with no spotter would be a bit of an oxymoron. Either way, this hobby is basically dead for lone pilots if they want to try doing it legally. I'm a member of FPV UK (for now at least) so I have a few extra months grace before I need to decide whether to throw money down the toilet by giving it to the CAA, or whether to give it to a more worthy charitable cause instead who will actually do something good in this world with the money. • Posts: 668 Threads: 31 Likes Received: 208 in 158 posts Likes Given: 95 Joined: Feb 2019 Reputation: 14 Meanwhile in Portugal, fresh news, the drone register portal has been delayed because of some shady business with a software developing house that didn't went thru.
We already have a web portal from our aeronautics entity where we must apply for flying authorizations.
I've been lucky because, until the latest request, I always had 60 days authorization from sunrise to sunset. Of course I always request for only 30 AGL at isolated areas, nothing with people or private property around, so really safe flying.
Now things started to change, for authorizations I always have to make a phone call to the closest militar base that is not really close and get an answer to fly on the same places. And yes, to be really legal, only LOS fpv with a spotter.
I never flown with someone, always by myself, and yes I always request for authorizations even knowing that I fly safe on really safe areas, but I can see that all these laws are being made for the ones that don't do stupid things and fly safe.
With this, almost 2 million is being wasted on a really basic platform that will do nothing no mitigate or prevent harm.
My hope is that rules will be written but police force will use their good sense to act only on really stupid cases and not the 99% of the cases of the typical drone "racer" pilots. • Posts: 181 Threads: 3 Likes Received: 39 in 35 posts Likes Given: 38 Joined: Oct 2019 Reputation: 3 The question still needs to be answered in numerous countries. Why would one register an FPV "drone" that will knowingly be used in contravention of those very regulations? I understand being compliant and law-abiding, believe me. However, there is still no provision for compliant use of an FPV toy other than consenting to be guilty on paper if one registers and exposing one's self to the liability of knowingly operating outside of regulations, terms of licensing, etc. in the first place. I wonder if a person is more screwed by actually appearing to be legal and knowingly operating "illegally" by flying FPV than if they just stay under the radar and play dumb if the wrong person wants to make an issue. Any lawyers around here? • Posts: 668 Threads: 31 Likes Received: 208 in 158 posts Likes Given: 95 Joined: Feb 2019 Reputation: 14 (07-Nov-2019, 07:04 PM)ProppedCodger Wrote: The question still needs to be answered in numerous countries. Why would one register an FPV "drone" that will knowingly be used in contravention of those very regulations? I understand being compliant and law-abiding, believe me. However, there is still no provision for compliant use of an FPV toy other than consenting to be guilty on paper if one registers and exposing one's self to the liability of knowingly operating outside of regulations, terms of licensing, etc. in the first place. I wonder if a person is more screwed by actually appearing to be legal and knowingly operating "illegally" by flying FPV than if they just stay under the radar and play dumb if the wrong person wants to make an issue. Any lawyers around here? I think that if there is some kind of agenda with these drone rules, playing dumb will yeld the same results infortunately. But that's a nice question. I also would like to know if, legally, there is some kind of atenuation on those circunstances. • Posts: 181 Threads: 3 Likes Received: 39 in 35 posts Likes Given: 38 Joined: Oct 2019 Reputation: 3 07-Nov-2019, 11:44 PM (This post was last modified: 07-Nov-2019, 11:46 PM by ProppedCodger.) (07-Nov-2019, 09:48 PM)Maiden Flight Wrote: I think that if there is some kind of agenda with these drone rules, playing dumb will yeld the same results infortunately.
But that's a nice question. I also would like to know if, legally, there is some kind of atenuation on those circunstances. Look into the case of a Mr. Gu I believe, who flew his Phantom over the crowds gathered for the Raptors win in toronto recently. He has flown over large crowds quite a few times before during such events and is known to have done so from video posted to his social media accounts. Class C airspace, no license, no commercial license, no SOC, no authorized machine for over-flying people, no registered "drone"... The police did nothing because they accepted his apology instead. An apology. Transport Canada concluded there was not enough evidence to proceed with their "investigation" at one point despite Instagram video with Gu's name and commentary on it. He was eventually fined CA$2750. Naturally this caused outrage among responsible and professional pilots being the pathetic joke that it is. • Posts: 1,312 Threads: 50 Likes Received: 832 in 504 posts Likes Given: 372 Joined: Jul 2018 Reputation: 51 (07-Nov-2019, 11:44 PM)ProppedCodger Wrote: The police did nothing because they accepted his apology instead. That's so Canadian.
The ground is for dead people. • |
