The CAA have launched a new consultation for the review of UK UAS regs.
The CAA have launched a consultation on proposals to make it easier for drone users to fly safely and meet regulatory requirements.
The proposals are based on feedback from the drone community in a previous Call for Input. Proposals include introduction of product requirements for drones, extension of Flyer ID training to users of drones under 250g, introduction of Remote ID and extension of time period to adopt class-marked drones by 2 years.
Am I allowed to say Iâm just too fkin bored with their endless rubbishâŚ? Their whole Call for Input exercise was just a facade to pretend they were consulting the public for their already-decided agendaâŚ
Theyâve lost all credibility and sadly many people just ignore their ever changing rules nowâŚ
Gone through the entire thing in overview , but itâs interesting they are using reports from the public to justify things like remote ID, not reports that were followed up and found to be illegal⌠Itâs like Karen standing on a motorway bridge counting cars she thinks are going a bit quick and basing numbers of cars speeding, and therefore road traffic laws on thatâŚ
This latest document makes that point very clear. Over 60% of respondents were against RID, with just 15.3% for, so we are going to implement two RID systems, one of which centrally logs all UAV activity so we can prosecute you at our convenience. Astonishing, and although they mention over 18,000 reports to the police for drone related âconcernsâ, they are strangely silent on how many of those actually had any merit and resulted in enforcement action. Iâd be very interested to know!
Iâve only given the document a cursory scan but Iâve already tuned into the fact that they are hellbent on pushing the hobbyist out of the sky.
By hobbyist I donât mean those that fly store bought, mainly DJI, models, though they are still begrudgingly accepting they exist. Iâm referring to those of us that roll our own creations, whether they are single rotor, multirotor, fixed wing VTOL, or even unpowered.
If the changes were to do with âsafetyâ, and not commercial pressure, thereâd be just one rule, and that would be âDONâT BE A TITâ.
Ironically the UK Government are currently looking at a similar system to the American Blue List, which is essentially sourcing UAS technology from within the UK. Fat chance of that happening when you canât even get authorisation to fly a foam fixed wing BVLOS across Morcombe Bay.
"In the document âReview of UK Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Regulations, Published: 22nd November 2023â, mention is made of the number of drone related police reports made:
âBetween November 2020 and October 2023, police received 18,290 reports of drone flights
involving a legal, nuisance, criminal or safety concern. Police received 5,005 such reports
between 1st January and 6th October 2023 - a 10% increase over the same period in 2022.â
As this number is being used as justification for further restriction of UAS operations by private individuals, especially given the propensity of some individuals to complain about anything they personally donât like, I would like to know the following:
How many of the 18,290 reports were followed up and fully investigated
Of reports fully investigated, how many were found to be valid complaints with drone operation being at fault
Of reports fully investigated, how many were found to NOT be the fault of drone operation
If this information is not available, then I would suggest that the CAA would be basing its decision making regarding UAS operation on baseless accusations, to the detriment of the UAS hobby community
In reality the vast majority of complaints will have been made by people who donât understand the regulations. Unfortunately these regulations are thought up by the âwe have all the facts figures and statistics and know everythingâ Whitehall brigade. Maybe educating the public should be a requirement.
I have also borrowed parts of your enquiry for my own:
In the document âReview of UK Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS) Regulations, Published: 22nd November 2023â, mention is made of the number of drone related police reports made:
âBetween November 2020 and October 2023, police received 18,290 reports of drone flights
involving a legal, nuisance, criminal or safety concern. Police received 5,005 such reports
between 1st January and 6th October 2023 - a 10% increase over the same period in 2022.â
As this number is being used as justification for further restriction of UAS operations by private individuals, especially given the propensity of some individuals to complain about anything they personally donât like, I would like to know the following:
How many of the 18,290 reports were followed up and fully investigated?
Of reports fully investigated, how many were found to be valid complaints with UAS operators being in contravention of the prevailing rules?
Of valid complaints, how many incidents involved properly registered users with the relevant operator and flyer IDs?
I have just discovered the consultation document via a YouTube video, having previously taken the time to respond to your âCall for Inputâ which I also discovered via a YouTube video.
Can you please advise why all respondents to the CFI were not informed by email? I shouldnât have to discover it by pure luck. How are you planning to make sure others are notified?
I am unable to find the risk assessment used to determine the risks of flying a Mavic 3 within 150m of a single building at up to 400ft agl that would lead you to suggest modifying the A3 category to include single buildings. Can you please advise if that document is public and/or confirm its existence? Given I can fly a GA aircraft up to 5700kg directly overhead a single building at 500ft, I wonder just how that particular risk has been quantified?
The incident logs for âdronesâ normally even include drone pilots reporting assaults and robbery. Logs even get counted for credit card fraud where a drone has been bought and thereâs even been logs mistaking fireworks for drones.
Iâve tried to keep up with their continual & frankly ill informed changes & decisions.
Iâve spent a lot of money on equipment, invested in training (A2 CofC), paid for insurance & fly I safely & responsibly, making great efforts not to annoy anyone.
What on earth are their proposals based on?
Where are all the accidents &/or crimes involving drones?
To be honest, Iâm not even sure I want a hobby that causes me this much of a headache.
Especially when you see that the report only has 3 detailed reports involving UAS, of which only one was a hobby flight ( fixed wing model ) - no drones.
Interestingly microlights, which appear to have less regulation than drones, were responsible for two deaths.
