There is going to be live coverage of this event on Parliament TV tomorrow at 09:45 GMT: https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5a...681491b5d1

The live debate is also going to be broadcast on standard TV channels: Freeview channel 131, Freesat channel 201, Virgin channel 612, Tiscali channel 502 and Sky channel 504.
If any UK pilots have a few spare hours to kill tomorrow, this farce of a kangaroo court inquiry could make an interesting watch and could well be on par with watching paint dry Unfortunately I'll be at work doing something slightly more interesting. We all know the decision has already been made so this live debate is just for lip service. From the list of people attending, it seems that there aren't even any representatives present from any of the UK flying clubs 

The inquiry seems to have been kept pretty quiet but apparently anyone who sent in comments regarding the UK Drone Registration Scheme Charge Proposal were sent an email notification about the live debate, but as I used a fake name and email address in my response, I didn't get one.

https://ikopta.co.uk/evidence-hearing-commercial-and-recreational-drone-use-in-the-uk

I actually watched the recorded inquiry pretty much all the way through after I got home from work on Tuesday and I thought what was being said was actually quite interesting. It didn't turn out to be the kangaroo court I thought it might be, but it's quite clear is that no-one really has a clue and that the whole UK drone registration proposal is not fit for purpose.

One thing I did find amusing though is that when pressed about the logic behind a 250 gram cut-off threshold, no-one really seemed to know and it was suggested that it was a weight that was considered safe enough not to pose any significant risks (Q34 in the in the transcript link below). And it was also suggested that a drone of that weight would only realistically be able to fly a few hundred metres at most and so posed no real dangers (see Q61 and Q62 in the transcript link below). It seems that everyone is just thinking of consumer toy drones and no-one even seems to have considered FPV quads in that weight category that can go 100+ mph. And I guess none of them have ever heard of the long range Crossfire or the R9 systems either

A complete written transcript of the inquiry can be found at the following link...

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidenc...02959.html

Dylan has also just posted a very brief summary of the inquiry in his video below...

(14-Jun-2019, 01:22 PM)SnowLeopardFPV Wrote: I actually watched the recorded inquiry pretty much all the way through after I got home from work on Tuesday and I thought what was being said was actually quite interesting. It didn't turn out to be the kangaroo court I thought it might be, but it's quite clear is that no-one really has a clue and that the whole UK drone registration proposal is not fit for purpose.

One thing I did find amusing though is that when pressed about the logic behind a 250 gram cut-off threshold, no-one really seemed to know and it was suggested that it was a weight that was considered safe enough not to pose any significant risks (Q34 in the in the transcript link below). And it was also suggested that a drone of that weight would only realistically be able to fly a few hundred metres at most and so posed no real dangers (see Q61 and Q62 in the transcript link below). It seems that everyone is just thinking of consumer toy drones and no-one even seems to have considered FPV quads in that weight category that can go 100+ mph. And I guess none of them have ever heard of the long range Crossfire or the R9 systems either

How many uninformed decisions have the politicians made for us over the years, just like this one.
So f***** ridiculous...