So you jump from the company providing mapping to them controlling the airspace.
Chris, I think if you look a bit deeper into Guardian/ Altitude Angel, they do say they are developing an āintegrated airspaceā Hmmmm integrated for who though ?
Yeah seen all that , but thinking that Amazon and Argos are going to get exclusive on the sub 400ft airspace is pie in the sky
Just for the sake of ease, here it is in picture form - what canāt speak: canāt lie.
First image: relevant section - CAP1868.
Second image: Altitude Angel using Guardian UTM to lock airspace over private land.
Third image: Altitude Angel FAQās - clearly stating that drone operators have to pay a fee to fly over private landā¦ which is what National Trust properties, Historic England assetsā¦ etc. etc are. Question 6 in the FAQās answers that clearly enough.
Conspiracy theory? Good one. Oh how I laughed.
Good work
I totally agree with that sentiment Chris. The CAA and Altitude Angel seem to be dreaming of some sort of utopian future. To become true would need a leap in battery and drone technology anyway 
1 Like
they can fxxx right off!!! not paying for a privileged bunch of txxxx, who decided to donate their properties into trust to avoid paying taxes and death duties like peasants have to!
2 Likes
Probably part of their master plan will be to eventually charge you to fly round your own garden.
The AA (not that one) do point out the difference between controlled airspace and uncontrolled airspace when it comes to flight āacrossā permissions.
Though if I recall, the CAA werenāt keen on controlled airspace operators charging for access ā¦ canāt remember the reference though.
Meanwhile in the USAā¦
not that unusual in Americaā¦ taking a ripsaw to McDonaldāsā¦ if you can you can doā¦
probably need to get back on topic (sorry!)
Is anyone aware of a way of complaining about the basis of this consultation?
I will complete the response as they have requested, but Iād like to query / complain about the basis of the need for additional regulation.
The opening section discusses the need for the additional restrictions, based mainly on unsubstantiated garbage and the issues at Gatwick.
The whole basis of this consultation is flawed and I want to register my concerns (yes, I know Iāll be shouting into the void, but I am frustrated)!
1 Like
has everyone read and had a shot at replying to the consultation?
deadline in 10th Januaryā¦
donāt miss the deadline!
consultations are like democracy and politicsā¦ if you cannot be bothered then donāt be upset when you end up with what you did not want, if you have your say (any say, even to say itās bs for xyz) then you have given it your best shot.
2000 noās are better than 100% silence.
no you donāt have to have the gift of the gab, just RESPOND!!!
2 Likes
I know what you mean! Iāve just finished the consultation document and sent it off.
A feeling of āat least Iāve tried, but I doubt itāll do any goodā if the last consultation is anything to go by. (especially regarding opposition to RID)
CAA state that 2629 responses received from the last consultation.
Doesnāt bode well for this oneā¦.
well we have to keep going and plugging itā¦ suggest maybe the GADC send out a call GADC members message maybe to ask for people to respond
itās like thisā¦ say my council thinks itās a really good idea to lower the speed limit to 5mph and charge everyone to park Ā£10 per hourā¦ consultation sent out ā¦ no one respondedā¦ what do we getā¦ democracy at workā¦
at least if itās an autocracy we know where we stand. CBA does not = better, it just = thin end of the wedge as guess what in 12m time the CAA will want to āimproveā things again, and the same in another 12m etc etc etc.
Just trying / tried to fill out this form, is it me or when youāve answered a few pages it then starts to contradict on what youāve all ready answered previous 
Edit : itās ok Iāve figured it out.
yup, itās purposefully set up to be confusing:
question 1)
. Do you agree or disagree with our proposal to allow C1 UAS to fly over uninvolved people in the A1 sub-category, aligning to regulations for C0 and <250g UAS? Please explain your answer.
Question 2)
Do you agree or disagree with our proposal to explicitly allow C0 and C1 UAS to fly in the A3 sub-category? Please explain your answer.
yup make C1 = C0, then dump C0 + C0 into A3ā¦ fly far away from buildings, commercial, residential etc spacesā¦ got to love it!!! if the CAA see the risk to uninvolved persons as lowā¦ why is the risks to buildings etc now considered high?
Iām not the best at this itās confusing the 
out of me,
I wish there was a section that I could just say, whatās the point in this happy horse shit ( wasting our time ) as you wonāt / donāt or will not listen as youāve all ready made your minds up !
So stop wasting our time & yours ( meaning thereās )
I wouldnāt or wonāt do this but itās pissing me off as it is all you guys, their running rings round us blatantly 
Lastly theyāre full of crap ! Sorry for my frustration.
Lastly
No disrespect to the police but depending on the situation itās very rarely they attend crimes now unless itās really serious, due to less police etc etc, government funds cut & all that, but they can find the money to work alongside each other for this ie ( police / caa ) ? Donāt make sense, go & catch the real criminals not going off topic & those who are a danger to the caa / airspace etc & leave us the alone hmmmm wishful thinking hey !
No doubt theyāll be a separate number for Karenās to complain,
The drone hotline, be engaged forever !!!