One For The Drone Pilots.

[Mouldy]

1 hour ago, Vaughan said:

And if that's all that happened to him he should be thankful.

I repeat that there are going to be a lot more of these confrontations, if people are going to fly their latest toy over other people's gardens.

A legal limit of 150ft?  

Why do people grow hedges around their gardens?  Because they want to spend an afternoon in the sun in peace and privacy in their own homes.

This is turning into a gross intrusion and I fear no good will come of it. 

Just asking, not to be confrontational, but just to identify what is perceived to be an invasion of privacy.  Folk cruise through Irstead and take photos and videos of those beautiful properties every day.  There are dozens of videos on YouTube which are openly viewable around the world.  For years, no one has batted an eyelid about that.  Does the fact that this has been taken with a drone make it any more so?

A good many of us live in properties that have been photographed by Google and can be seen in Street view and on Satellite mode which in some areas does result in highly detailed images.  Irstead is not one of those, but the area of the garden can still clearly be seen.

[Wussername]

The problem is of course is who owns the drone. Your local pervert, an enthusiastic photographer, an estate agent perhaps,or a farmer, electricity engineers inspecting pylons, the Fire Brigade. Who knows.

Forgot to mention, the police. You would be amazed of the number of drones they have in Norfolk. Forget all this silly business of Police Interceptors on television, drones are the most effectual observance bit of kit imaginable.

Do not mess with a police drones. There is not a single day in Norfolk that they are not used. You do not see them, you do not hear them. They have very high definition cameras that cover enourmous distance at a very high operational height.

They do not match the capabilities of the military drone. However in the fullness of time they will as the former progresses to embrace future technology.

 

 

 

 

 

[Wussername]

Some of this future technology will filter down to the private sector.

In this respect I share Vaughan's concern. Perhaps we should share this concern, as I do.

[Meantime]

29 minutes ago, Wussername said:

Some of this future technology will filter down to the private sector.

Yes it will, but the laws and regulations are already changing to keep pace.

A few years back there was no rules.

Then there was the drone code.

Now it has been superseded and laws are in place and registration with the CAA etc.

If you still own a toy, below 250g you don't need flyer or operator ID.

If it is not a toy, still below 250g and has no camera you still don't need flyer or operator ID.

Once you add a camera or go above 250g, basically anything that is not a toy, you need to abide by the rules and be registered.

The rules are changing and becoming increasingly complex and will keep up with the advent of technology.

The most intrusive thing about drones is the irritating noise they make. As for getting a close up of you in your Speedos in the back garden, that's more likely to happen from a slow moving boat.

[Wussername]

Do those who break the rules conform to regulations. I think not.

Do we have the means, the finance, the resolve. I think not.

[OldBerkshireBoy]

You could have fun with one of these little babies, three cameras and night vision, silent and so small.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/what-are-black-hornets-the-cutting-edge-micro-drones-donated-to-ukraine/ar-AA118H09?ocid=EMMX&cvid=519f1118bc884a5ebcbc007f51624664

[floydraser]

On 25/08/2022 at 15:49, Mouldy said:

Have a look at this:

Is that an invasion of privacy?  How much detail can be seen?  Are there people who could be recognised in the photo?  Can any car registration numbers be identified?  Would it be practical to ‘bang on a few doors’ to explain what is happening?

There are lots of questions, but in reality, who’s privacy has been invaded?  Lots of organisations try to prohibit overflight, some are reasonable, some aren’t, but with the exception of sensitive sites, like airports, prisons etc and areas of protected nesting birds and military activity.  Most considerate drone pilots will take all of these into consideration, but like another discussion on here regarding running of boat engines, there are always differences of opinion.

Drone flight for me, is an extension of my main hobby - photography.  It gives me the opportunity to get images of familiar locations from a different viewpoint.

With respect, I think you're over reacting. I could ask, if that were the shots taken by the estate agent's drone, which house is for sale? It's the same as taking images of a large crowd of people versus a close up of an individual. The estate agent's drone would have so close it was most probably being heard as well as seen. 

None of your footage seen on here should upset anyone.

As I hinted at before, drones are still new to most people. As a professional photographer (in another life, on another planet it seems!) I never had any problems when asking people if I could impose on their property. In fact, most were only too glad to help if only for the anecdote value. How many here would object if a drone pilot explained why he wanted to overfly their house? Not me, but I would be well p*ssed off if he/she didn't.

Unless it's the police looking for an old gentleman with dementia, as happened here about a week ago. They found him ok. But it still made a noise which could have been defined as a nuisance under other circumstances.

[MauriceMynah]

It seems to me that it's the question that needs to be sorted out first. It's no good just shouting out "There should be a law against it", without accurately working out exactly what the "it" is, that you want to make illegal.

Sorry folks but in my book, "Invasion of privacy" doesn't quite cut it for me. I am aware that spy planes/satellites are unseen by us yet they can count the spots on a ladybird's wing case. Does that bother me? No.

I have no idea how many times I have appeared on CCTV. Am I worried? Not in the least

If I were to buy a riverside property, would I object to boaters taking photos of it, no, not at all. Would it therefore be reasonable for me to think nothing of a drone taking more photos of my house, I cannot think of a logical reason why I should not.

These are the times we live in. Technology advances sometimes for the good, sometimes less so, but the advances did, do,and always will continue.

It is my opinion that if one person is helped/saved by a private individual using a drone, then having one film me scratching my bits is a very small price to pay.

 

 

[Wussername]

We all have a defined moral compass which embraces our standards. Acknowledged and respected by us all. Some do not. Within our complex society we have children, the elderly, the vunerable. 

There are those who have no compunction whatsoever in contravening those standards. It is those people who we have to legislate against. Those who live in our society. Drug dealers, terrorists, activists. 

The drone has become a toy. There needs to be more control. You do not have to look very far, across Europe to witness its impact, on peoples lives.

 

[floydraser]

14 hours ago, MauriceMynah said:

 

It is my opinion that if one person is helped/saved by a private individual using a drone, then having one film me scratching my bits is a very small price to pay.

 

Warning: If you ever pass MM's boat, youngsters should be encouraged to look in the opposite direction. 

On the other hand, that does give me an idea for an Onlyfans page.......

[FairTmiddlin]

6 hours ago, floydraser said:

Warning: If you ever pass MM's boat, youngsters should be encouraged to look in the opposite direction. 

On the other hand, that does give me an idea for an Onlyfans page.......

If it was Old Nyx in it's hey day. You wouldn't have spotted it. Just sort of melded into the vegetation.

[Wussername]

1 hour ago, FairTmiddlin said:

If it was Old Nyx in it's hey day. You wouldn't have spotted it. Just sort of melded into the vegetation.

The boat was camouflaged. On one occasion a member of this forum said to MM " Hi! MM, did not see you on the river Ant this weekend"

MM replied " Thank you "

 

[grendel]

so if we see a drone flying nearby the answer is to whip out our 'bits' and scratch them, at the very least the drone pilot is in for a shock when he reviews the footage.

must remember to pack my drill bits next trip, for the scratching of.

[floydraser]

16 hours ago, grendel said:

so if we see a drone flying nearby the answer is to whip out our 'bits' and scratch them, at the very least the drone pilot is in for a shock when he reviews the footage.

must remember to pack my drill bits next trip, for the scratching of.

I would be very proud if a drone could see my bits from 500ft! 

[Bernard]

Drones don't like it if you accidentally cast your fishing line over them so I have heard, dont put up much of a fight reeling  them in though.

[marshman]

Thinking about it realistically, does any one really believe you could cast over a flying drone? They would have to be flying very very low - must have been well attracted to get such close ups of whatever bits were on view! 

I suspect the best you could achieve that unlikely scenario was if, the drone was on the ground!! Sounds a bit like other fishermen's tales!!!

[OldBerkshireBoy]

Where is Spiderman when you want him!