This is what is driving the CAA … https://youtu.be/w2PtlNE2_uw?feature=shared
Hi all, new joiner to the site and a brand new pilot (stepping up from toys, and the occasional model aircraft when I was younger).
I’m still catching up on and digesting the new proposed / draft regulations but from the gist of what I’m seeing - I’m very concerned as this is a hobby I’ve wanted to start for a long time and of course I don’t want to see it restricted unnecessarily.
Someone previously mentioned a letter to an MP as a next step, Would something like this as a letter to an MP cover the right points accurately? Also conscious that I haven’t exactly asked for anything specific in the letter and one letter to one MP would be likely to fall on deaf ears.
Dear [MP’s Name],
I am writing to you as a concerned unmanned aerial system (UAS / ‘drone’) pilot regarding the upcoming changes to the UK’s UAS regulations. As a member of the UAS community, I believe the proposed regulations are overly restrictive, unnecessary, and disproportionate, impacting the legitimate use of drones.
The Civil Aviation Authority’s (CAA) policy decisions appear to be based on unverified data, as highlighted in recent Freedom of Information requests and seem to serve no valid purpose other than to indulge and satisfy an unfounded and negative public perception of drones. This raises concerns about the validity of the proposed regulations. Furthermore, the new regulations would restrict only the legitimate users of the community rather than target the very small minority who do misuse the technology.
Drones have proven to be incredibly safe, and these new regulations seem to be an overreach that could stifle innovation and the positive use of UAV technology. It’s essential that policies are based on accurate data and a balanced understanding of the risks and benefits of drone technology.
I urge you to consider these points and advocate for a more reasonable approach to UAV regulation that supports innovation and responsible use, rather than indiscriminately restricting it.
Thank you for your attention to this matter, and I would be happy to delve in to the specific concerns shared amongst the majority of the UAS community.
Sincerely,
Further to my last, would starting a petition be of any use at all perhaps?
To a great extent, yes. You have the likes of Amazon, Google, and a multitude of Venture Capitalists, lobbying for priority use of the lower airspace. However the technology is not presently available, nor will it be for many years to come.
The Bristol to London simulation is nothing more than an exercise in the absurd as the battery technology for such a flight does not exist. Even if it did it would be more prudent to install it into an already proven flight platform, such as a helicopter. A helicopter is far more efficient and can autorotate in the event of a power failure, where as a multirotor Just accelerates at 9.8 metres per second, squared, downwards.
Who would be the target audience for this, when you consider that it’s much easier, and cheaper to travel from Temple Meade to London by rail? The simulation has as much credibility simulating an anti-gravity propulsion system powered from zero-point energy doing the same flight.
This is the Catholic Church versus Science all over again.
1 Like
Rather like the video released by the FAA earlier this year. Seems to me some NATS employees spend far too much time asleep, dreaming of a utopian future.
I find it hard to believe that NATS spend money on such videos 
I think NATS are living in the future… vtol autonomous taxis… really?
I’m not saving never, I’m just not so sure I see a market to do it cost effectively unless we make the roads and rail so bad that the only or best means to travel from A to B is via low level air travel.
sure if we make road and rail travel so expensive that air travel is now cost effective, sure, but at the moment battery technology in relation to flight time is what?
what ever happened to maglev trains?
HS2 anyone…
A lot of that’s now cancelled. ( probably need the money to be spent on delivery drone technology)
I personally can’t see drones ever being used in the way some people dream they’re going to be used ( every day deliveries/ taxi service/ personal flying transport, etc, etc.
agreed … thing is all the blue sky thinking and moon shots are paid for by the tax payer…
I wonder how GA pilots would react if the CAA suddenly told them they weren’t allowed to fly out of sight of the airfield they took off from, and had to orient themselves only by looking out of the windows without recourse to their instruments…
Bruce (XJet) on YouTube has recently uploaded a scathing review of the CAA document. I found it very interesting.
One point he makes is that the CAA document states that Remote ID has been rolled out successfully in many other countries (USA, EU, Japan), but as he highlights, they do not offer any evidence of how it has reduced the things it claims to prevent (malicious drone flights, flights in FRZ, flights over sensitive areas etc.)
It’s worth watching before you put pen to paper 
2 Likes
Thanks for that, Budgie. Bruce, certainly takes it apart very nicely - so easy to understand.
All this palaver for something the CAA refer to as a “Toy with a camera”
If you read through CAP1868, you’ll find one or two interesting things. First (in the footnotes) all ‘illegal acts’ mentioned in the document are ‘alleged’ - meaning that the pressing need for greater security and oversight is based on hearsay and kneejerk bullshit, not fact. This has been the case since 2019 (when this document was published), and second that the mysterious ‘stakeholders’ sitting round the table deciding who can fly and where are named… Two of whom are DJI (for their Airsense tech and their UUID database) and Altitude Angel, who are even now flogging off the State Asset that is the sub-400’ airspace to the rich and privileged so that they can close off flight access to all us common oiks… Don’t believe me? Type ‘GUARDIAN UTM’ into the search bar and read through their sales bumf. Altitude Angel is the company that is going to be controlling drone flight in both Europe and the UK when the new “Unified Approach to the Introduction of UAS Traffic Management” gets implemented.
1 Like
Conspiracy theory alert.
Just a quick rant, but I’ve noticed a bunch of drone related posts coming up on my Facebook feed from groups I’m not even a part of.
And there are a worrying number of videos people are posting of either range tests, or their drone running out of battery whilst >1 mile away from them.
I’m sure plenty of people are guilty of breaking VLOS etc from time to time, but for goodness sakes - don’t post about it on open groups online. All that does is fuel the argument “drone operators cannot be trusted”.
2 Likes
That’s the meta way.
Logs all your keystrokes and bloats you with shite
I used to get this a lot…I switched from Chrome to Safari and what a difference it made over a 5 day period of surfing.
1 Like
interesting that… the government may be thinking … 3g phone licence cash cow again!!! (£22.47 billion!!!)
CAA are just a government quango
You’ll find the majority are…. Useless and a waste of taxpayers money.
Not at all milkie, try looking at the document I listed and then try looking at the Guardian web site … It’s called due diligence and research, but you feel free to keep your head buried in the sand.