Illegal Drone Flight

[oldgregg]

This one amuses me as a drone pilot as it's unbelievably obvious that you can't fly without permission in a built-up area of any kind (and yes that includes Broads villages!!)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-49513692

 

[SPEEDTRIPLE]

Whilst I do believe in safety and security, I also believe some of these restrictions are way over the top. Yes, drones Should avoid regulated airspace, but no plane is going to be flying that low over Norwich Castle unless it's about to crash. Most drone flyers fly with a lot of common sense, but authority will use the excuse of a few bad ones to bring in strict rules, licenses, and exams, all of which won't be cheap. Punish the innocent to get to the guilty, or just good old authority seeing a golden opportunity of revinue raising. Or am I yet again being a little too synical?. 

[Meantime]

9 minutes ago, SPEEDTRIPLE said:

Whilst I do believe in safety and security, I also believe some of these restrictions are way over the top. Yes, drones Should avoid regulated airspace, but no plane is going to be flying that low over Norwich Castle unless it's about to crash. Most drone flyers fly with a lot of common sense, but authority will use the excuse of a few bad ones to bring in strict rules, licenses, and exams, all of which won't be cheap. Punish the innocent to get to the guilty, or just good old authority seeing a golden opportunity of revinue raising. Or am I yet again being a little too synical?. 

I think the point your totally missing is the damage they can do to people or property if they drop out of the sky, become uncontrollable, or go out of range, as well as the invasion of privacy in many cases. I must confess being surprised at some of the footage shared on this forum. Whilst good and interesting, more than the odd one or two fall outside of the regulations in relation to flying without permission too close to people and buildings. Even on the Broads there are actually very few places you can legally fly and comply with the current regulations.

[oldgregg]

16 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

Even on the Broads there are actually very few places you can legally fly and comply with the current regulations.

Very few, yeah.

In terms of safety, probably the best bet is Breydon (and only when it's quiet) as realistically you're not going to accidentally overfly or come within the 150ft limit of any people or other boats unless you're on a huge radius and the only likely damage is to the drone, provided you stay above the height of the posts.

And yeah, the point is safety mostly. Yes you're unlikely to encounter an aircraft in Norwich city centre, but contact with a bird is likely to break a rotor (and the bird) and both are coming down on someone's  property (or their head)....

[BroadsAuthority]

Thanks for the link @oldgregg, certainly an interesting read and you raise a good point about the need to not fly in built-up areas, even in the relatively quiet (at times) Broads!

We support the guidance given in the article. Drone flying has become popular here and it's important that the legislation is enforced and education is given to people. There's a lot of nature reserves, ancient monuments and wildlife here that can be quite easily disturbed or damaged by drones, so we fully support responsible piloting.

Off the top of my head we haven't had any notable reports or incidents of 'drone misuse' here in the Broads. That isn't to say we haven't heard about people flying in less than favourable areas from time-to-time.

There's guidance on our website if anyone is interested: https://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/visiting/drone-use

Best,

Tom

[Matt]

Several times I have seen people flying drones from the roof of their cruiser whilst moored at Ranworth Staithe. Just last month one flew around the green at Ranworth at about 12 foot off the ground much to the amusement of its pilot!


Sent from my iPhone using Norfolk Broads Network

[ChrisB]

)I have imposed a drone no-fly zone in the airspace above Chris's Acres.

I have found a very good drone deterent, see below. Having said that if I shot like I did yesterday at the clay club I would probably miss.

[marshman]

Classic example here of technology overtaking existing legislation and people think "they are doing no harm" when in fact there are a host of issues if you sit down for more than a minute, and think about it.!

The new legislation due later in the year cannot come in a moment too soon - leave it too long and it will be too late! A classic and growing issue with new technology is motorised scooters - of course you should not be a killjoy but riding them on public roads and pavements should only be allowed if you have compulsory insurance. Cyclists were missed at an early stage and now its all a bit of closing the door after the horse has bolted - if you injure or damage property you should be able to trace the culprit and charge him accordingly.

[oldgregg]

15 minutes ago, Matt said:

Several times I have seen people flying drones from the roof of their cruiser whilst moored at Ranworth Staithe. Just last month one flew around the green at Ranworth at about 12 foot off the ground much to the amusement of its pilot!

I have seen a number of such incidents, yeah. There was a guy flying a Mavic Pro from the hill at Salhouse last year, which was a double whammy of overflying people and property and flying within a no-fly zone (due to the fact that it's very close to Norwich airport). After a while, the rangers did go and have a discussion with him and it got packed away.

In most cases, I've just been astounded that the operator was being so careless. I'm far from perfect, having totalled a DJI drone myself, but not on the Broads and not causing any damage to third-party property because it wasn't being flown near any.

[DAVIDH]

19 minutes ago, oldgregg said:

There was a guy flying a Mavic Pro from the hill at Salhouse last year, which was a double whammy of overflying people and property and flying within a no-fly zone (due to the fact that it's very close to Norwich airport).

Just in the interests of keeping this debate accurate, Salhouse is not in the no-fly zone.
 

[dnks34]

You only need to watch the videos on Youtube of folk flying them above clouds or read about the near misses that are reported by aircraft to realise how dangerous the technology can be in Joe Bloggs hands. 

[Meantime]

It may not be in the airport exclusion zone, but I very much doubt if they had permission from the land owner to take off or land it on that land!. Salhouse moorings are also a very busy place during the season. Would they have also sought the permission of all the boat owners and those on board?

I do like seeing drone footage, but you do have to wonder at some of the choices people make when flying them.

[oldgregg]

58 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

Just in the interests of keeping this debate accurate, Salhouse is not in the no-fly zone.

It's not in the current, clarified exclusion zone but last year was showing both in the DJI software and on noflydrones as being in an area requiring permissions.

I checked.

And yeah, in any case flights there would require permission from Cators. They very clearly did not have it, judging by the discussion with the rangers.

[DAVIDH]

25 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

It may not be in the airport exclusion zone, but I very much doubt if they had permission from the land owner to take off or land it on that land!. Salhouse moorings are also a very busy place during the season. Would they have also sought the permission of all the boat owners and those on board?

Agree with all of that. The owners of the land have every right to restrict flying from there. I don't think however, unless I'm mistaken, that permission from the boat owners needs to be sought. The regulations just say not within 150 feet of people or within 150 metres of a built up area. (Again, just in the interests of accuracy)

[RumPunch]

How may people here own one ? ( yes I do have a small one, as well as several 'real' R/C aircraft / helis  together with competency certs for those / insurance )

[DAVIDH]

It's well know I own one. I too have public liability insurance.

[oldgregg]

23 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

Agree with all of that. The owners of the land have every right to restrict flying from there. I don't think however, unless I'm mistaken, that permission from the boat owners needs to be sought. The regulations just say not within 150 feet of people or within 150 metres of a built up area. (Again, just in the interests of accuracy)

This guy was within 150 ft of just about everybody on mooring area 2, and the forum meet.

Drones can be flown safely, as you know. Many people choose not to.

[Meantime]

29 minutes ago, DAVIDH said:

Agree with all of that. The owners of the land have every right to restrict flying from there. I don't think however, unless I'm mistaken, that permission from the boat owners needs to be sought. The regulations just say not within 150 feet of people or within 150 metres of a built up area. (Again, just in the interests of accuracy)

Genuine question here, because I think the BA page is slightly misleading in one regard. You quote above not within 150 feet of people or 150 metres of a built up area, which is very similar to the BA page. My understanding of the regs as they currently stand is not within 50 metres or 150 feet of people, but more importantly you must not fly OVER a congested area or large gathering of people with 150 metres or  450 feet, which is quite a distance.

I think the BA page tends to imply that you can fly over people if more than 50 metres in the air. My understanding was not within a radius of 50 metres or over at any height?

Edited to add:

I see the following on the BA page, "(The definition of congested area: ‘Congested area’ in relation to a city, town or settlement means any area which is substantially used for residential, industrial, commercial or recreational purposes’"

Which to my mind would seem to suggest that Salhouse being largely used for recreational purposes would fall into the congested category and therefore have a 150 metre, or 450 feet exclusion zone?

[oldgregg]

10 minutes ago, EastCoastIPA said:

I think the BA page tends to imply that you can fly over people if more than 50 metres in the air. My understanding was not within a radius of 50 metres or over at any height?

It's 500ft from crowds, and as the maximum altitude is 400ft then yeah - Not at any height.

https://dronesafe.uk/drone-code/

Obviously, if you have PfCO and suitable permissions in place for that location then you can do it.

https://www.caa.co.uk/Commercial-industry/Aircraft/Unmanned-aircraft/Small-drones/Permissions-and-exemptions-for-commercial-work-involving-small-unmanned-aircraft-and-drones/

Note the clarification "within 50m of people or properties/objects that are not under your control"

[Matt]

I think the 50m rule also applies to vessels not under your control?


Sent from my iPhone using Norfolk Broads Network

[oldgregg]

Yeah, absolutely.

And I've been overflown by one at no more than 50 feet (let alone metres) several times while out boating.
 

[Timbo]

Although I don't own one, the acquisition of one in the next year or so is on the cards to supplement existing research and film-making tools. I do have access to a fully integrated UAV LIDAR system, as you can imagine this piece of kit comes with it's own designated pilot who spends weeks filling out forms and obtaining permissions before the drone ever leaves the cupboard. The whole thing takes a very large chunk out of project funding but not quite as much as the bar tab for a team of archaeologists! Let's face it, there are nations with smaller deficits than that created by archaeologists in a bar! 

[marshman]

I am so pleased to see this aired here - the sooner this technology is taken out of the zone of "boys toys" then the better.

They are not toys and need to be regulated accordingly and carry the appropriate insurance.

[DAVIDH]

There is no need to overfly anyone. The regulations say that you must not be within 50mtrs of people or buildings or within 150mtrs of a built up area. Yes, the height limit is 120mtrs but the drone can be at that height and still over 150mtrs from you. To illustrate, if the guy (who I am not condoning in any way, he should not be launching near people) chose to launch his drone at Salhouse, at 6am on a sunny morning, when nobody was about, he flew it over the water to a distance of 150mtrs but at a height of just 50mtrs, then a member of the public came past, he is not doing anything wrong. The graphic below is from the drone code, referenced by Oldgregg, and it states not to overfly. You could still be just over 150mtrs from a crowd at a height of 50mtrs and still be within the regulations. (I think)

[oldgregg]

Yeah, I'd say so.

If there were no other people or boats at the moorings (or he had permission from all of them, such as at an NBN meet) and he were at a height of 50 metres then it would be okay.

Obviously, he would also need the landowner's permission, and would need to maintain the 50 metres safe zone during takeoff and landing as that's designed to allow for pilot error etc during those phases. No-one wants a Mavic embedded in Gold Gem 3 

At 164 feet (50 metres) altitude it is difficult to see most consumer drones, and at 400ft it's very hard to hear or see them. As a rule of thumb, if you can see or hear them then they're too low.

There is nothing wrong with drones per se, but unfortunately many people choose to ignore the rules and it seems that unlicensed use probably isn't going to last forever.