According to this guy, and he seems to be truthful, the UK CAA faked a picture of a drone buzzing an airliner at 30,000 feet, In order to promote the anti-drone laws.

Seems the New Zealand CAA did the same, by showing a photograph of a dented helicopter with smashed drone lying on the floor. In reality, the helicopter was damaged by a winch cable. Nothing to do with drones.

Are they going too far with these drone laws? They certainly shouldn't be making up utter nonsense and if they do simulate something like that in the form of an image, they should make it absolutely clear that its simulated, not real.

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 20223 yr by martin-w

Publication with the fake drone photo is here...

https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAA RPAS Safety Reporting Project (CAP2356).pdf

He stated two observations that should be obvious to anyone with even minimal knowledge:

1. There is not a propeller driven drone in existence that can reach FL30
2. There is not a propeller driven drone in existence that can fly at jet airliner speeds.

It is a false flag photoshopped image.

10 hours ago, martin-w said:

According to this guy, and he seems to be truthful, the UK CAA faked a picture of a drone buzzing an airliner at 30,000 feet, In order to promote the anti-drone laws.

Seems the New Zealand CAA did the same, by showing a photograph of a dented helicopter with smashed drone lying on the floor. In reality, the helicopter was damaged by a winch cable. Nothing to do with drones.

Are they going too far with these drone laws? They certainly shouldn't be making up utter nonsense and if they do simulate something like that in the form of an image, they should make it absolutely clear that its simulated, not real.

Not surprised. Just nudge theory in action.

Drones in the hands of the less capable / the unaware / the deliberately mischievous are deemed to be a threat to personal safety and personal privacy. Most importantly for a government organisation, they also pose a potential danger to the security of nationally important infrastructure, maintaining of state secrets, etc.
All-in-all, 'understandable' why they would seek to change public perception so that ever tighter controls are placed on who can operate drones and where.

The apparatus of the State always... (sorry, getting political now).

12 hours ago, F737MAX said:

understandable' why they would seek to change public perception so that ever tighter controls are placed on who can operate drones and where

 

Indeed... but fake photos are just not on. 

On 12/31/2022 at 1:43 PM, n4gix said:

There is not a propeller driven drone in existence that can reach FL30

https://interestingengineering.com/video/mini-diy-drone-flies-at-an-impressive-height-of-33000-feet-over-siberia

Noel

It used to be a kid would walk into a hobby shop and see the pretty planes buy a remote control kit. After lots of building time, the thing crashes and that's the end of that hobby in the family. But now these drones almost fly themselves. Even a Neanderthal can do it. 

19 hours ago, birdguy said:

https://interestingengineering.com/video/mini-diy-drone-flies-at-an-impressive-height-of-33000-feet-over-siberia

Noel

I am astonished that he not only managed to maintain control (barely) with the heavy winds, but also managed to have such a long range. That he actually managed to recover and land his drone practically at his feet was amazing!

On 1/1/2023 at 2:20 AM, F737MAX said:

Not surprised. Just nudge theory in action.

Drones in the hands of the less capable / the unaware / the deliberately mischievous are deemed to be a threat to personal safety and personal privacy. Most importantly for a government organisation, they also pose a potential danger to the security of nationally important infrastructure, maintaining of state secrets, etc.
All-in-all, 'understandable' why they would seek to change public perception so that ever tighter controls are placed on who can operate drones and where.

The apparatus of the State always... (sorry, getting political now).

All of this. I'm astonished they are allowed at all.

I hate the things and if one ever comes over my garden it won't make it out of my airspace.

At the very least they should be licensed and registered.

44 minutes ago, Jazz said:

At the very least they should be licensed and registered.

 

They are. 

14 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

They are. 

Are there not weight classes determining whether a licence is requitred or not? It was my understanding that below a certain weight this was not required in the UK.

16 minutes ago, Jazz said:

Are there not weight classes determining whether a licence is requitred or not? It was my understanding that below a certain weight this was not required in the UK.

 

Regulators around the world, UK, US, Canada, Europe Australia etc... have deemed that less than 250 gram drones  are pretty much harmless. They aren't heavy enough to cause significant harm. So at that weight or lower they are subject to fewer restrictions. Depends on the country, but in some countries such light drones aren't subject to even registration but in some countries they are.

In the UK, if your drone is under 250 grams, you still need an operator ID if your drone is not considered a toy. Owners usually have the required info on the bottom of their less than 250 gram drones in the UK. 

I have no issue with the light weight drones to be honest, they don't bother me in the least. I can certainly see how larger drones that might cause injury if they hit a person should be regulated more heavily though.  

Regardless of the weight though, safe operation, in terms of where and how you fly the drone needs to be followed. The CAA publish a Drone Code that has to be followed. 

There are a number of locations where the CAA restrict drone use. For example, I live on the coast, and flying any sized drone over the harbor is not allowed. Most drone software has "Geofencing" that alerts you when the drone is about to fly into a restricted area. The Drones will also hover in place rather than entering the restricted zone.

Edited January 5, 20233 yr by martin-w

3 minutes ago, martin-w said:

 

Regulators around the world, UK, US, Canada, Europe Australia etc... have deemed that less than 250 gram drones  are pretty much harmless. They aren't heavy enough to cause significant harm. So at that weight or lower they are subject to fewer restrictions. Depends on the country, but in some countries such light drones aren't subject to even registration but in some countries they are.

In the UK, if your drone is under 250 grams, you still need an operator ID if your drone is not considered a toy. Owners usually have the required info on the bottom of their less than 250 gram drones in the UK. 

I have no issue with the light weight drones to be honest, they don't bother me in the least. I can certainly see how larger drones that might cause injury if they hit a person should be regulated more heavily though.  

Regardless of the weight though, safe operation, in terms of where and how you fly the drone needs to be followed. The CAA publish a Drone Code that has to be followed. 

Thanks for the info.

However I have all sorts of problems with them including my own internal conflict on the matter regarding freedom.

One problem I have is that they are too easily weaponised or used to cause disruption. I wouldn't be surprised to see some of these eco-narcissists that glue their hands to the roads of Britain start flying them around Heathrow to be a nuisance (or worse). Drones have already caused all sorts of problems around airports including Heathrow if my memory is not faulting. Which it seems to do more as I age.

The trouble is, if I wanted one and I didn't want to to have the paperwork I don't think I would have much trouble getting one and doing as I pleased with it.

My other issue with them is one of privacy. I despise the fact there are cameras everywhere in this country. I absolutely despise it and to have them flying around above my head is yet another intollerable pushing of the boundaries as far as I'm concerned. I hate the idea that some nosy git from 200 yards up the road can fly one of these things over my garden for whatever purpose serves him and nevermind what the authorities may decide to use them for as they creep ever further towards what looks like an Orwellian future. Some of the ways I have seen them being deployed has chilled me to the core.

And that leads me to my own internal conflict on this issue. I don't like the banning or censorship of things. I believe the individual should have the freedom to do as they choose. Within reason. I am conflicted on the issue of drones and where the line of reasonable is.

However, It seems to me that it's just a matter of time until one of these things controlled by a muppet with or without an agenda brings down a plane full of people. If a pigeon can do it then one of these certainly can no matter how small it is. In fact, the more I think about it the more possibilities to do bad them come to mind.

In the United States you need a certification to fly a drone as a hobby. It’s called The Recreational UAS Safety Test (TRUST) and it can be obtained, for free, in less than an hour by passing an online test.

Drones under 250grams don't need to be registered.

Noel