@JetRex I’ve moved your post to an existing thread on this subject as it’s been discussed countless times over the years.
Bottom line:
4 Likes
Just a reminder, as been said many times before - don’t be a dick.
You can take off from outside an English Heritage or National Trust site and you can overfly it. A drone at an altitude of 300 to 400 feet won’t attract too much attention if any. A drone at 25 feet is a major annoyance.
Don’t be a dick.
7 Likes
Morning All. Just a quickie has anyone applied to English Heritage for permission to film on one of their sites. As per the instructions on their signs.
If so we’re/are there conditions to adhere to, or is it just a wasted paper exercise. Thanks.
A wasted paper exercise, TOAL away from their property and fly free!!!
2 Likes
Moved your post to this catch-all thread for the two PITAs …
In direct answer, yes, some have and paid the money they demanded for drone access : Southwest of London Meetup | Saturday 27th July 2024 Surrey, GU9 .. and .. Waverley Abbey Meet-up | £30 per pilot | Sunday 29th September
Check the opening times for the English Heritage / National Trust attraction you wish to fly over. Many are staffed 9-5. In summer you have useful daylight hours either side of those times.
It’s often less windy early morning and in the evening, there will be less people at the attractiion and the light from golden hour, although a cliché, often enhances the photo. Parking can be easier too. 
2 Likes
This might have already been covered, either here or somewhere else so apologies if so.
Re the national trust.
The website is somewhat contradictory.
It refers to the CAA stating that byelaws can restrict drone use BUT the the actual byelaws, dated 1965 obviously dont cover drone use specifically. The closest relevant reference i can see is section 15 regardings noise and disturbance. It goes on to mention radio, wireless etc.
So unless someone complains about noise it seems the byelaws don’t apply. People here are playing music a damn sight louder than a 250g drone at take off, not to mention the negligible noise when at height.
The website then goes on to state things like ‘MAY constitute tresspass, nuisance or harassment depending on how it is flown’
It goes on to mention other reasons why the national trust don’t like drones flown from there land. These seem to be mitigated by flying in strict accordance with the CAA rules with appropriate respect for property, nesting sites etc.
This along with zero ‘no drone’ signs makes me think a suck it and see attitude is justified.
1 Like
National Trust the main reason they dont like drones is money. If NT cant profit from something, they dont want it on their land.
The 1965 by-laws rely on it being a “conveyance” or disturbance and in theory the max fine is a one off £25. But before that they have to ask you to leave anyway.
They’re fond of trying to intimidate people with legal jargon and threats with “may” doing a lot of heavy lifting. Their old website was literally lying and dishonest so had to change it.
EH now has a much more honest website on Drones:-
Whilst we understand why drone users have an interest in flying at a historic site, we have a duty of care to both our properties and our visitors. When drones are used for professional purposes at our sites the pilot has to submit paperwork, risk assessments and flight plans to be approved by a member of our team. They are also asked to fly outside of opening hours for the safety of our visitors and to limit disruption to their day out. As a charity we simply do not have the resource to approve the recreational drone requests we receive and ensure they’re meeting our high safety standards.
Whilst we do not give permission for recreational users to take off and land at our sites we are aware that drone pilots adhering to the UK Drone Code may choose to fly over English Heritage sites (except in the cases of no-fly zones). We would strongly urge you not to do so for the safety of our visitors, staff, historic buildings, monuments and wildlife. We ask you to consider our charitable efforts to protect our sites as well as our visitors enjoying their day out.
I personally have no issue with those statements. They’re accurate, acknowledge the limitations of their powers but state their concerns, which whether you agree or not, is a perfectly valid way of doing things.
NT however, can f— right off in everything they do, not just drones.
1 Like
Succinctly put and thank you for the reply
Based on whats mentioned in your post I’ld almost be tempted to take a video of myself putting £25 in one of their charity pots just to confuse them further 
Edit I’ld also be happy putting together appropriate risk assessments etc if for no other reason than it’s good practise for GVC stuff.
To be fair, my biggest threat/risk assessment on the entire matrix is not smacking the patronising fossil in a NT fleece on Pen-y-Fan every time he tells me i cant fly from not-their-land and ends with “yes its illegal and no im not going to argue with you”.
Greatest risk of injury to a third party (him) or me (blood pressure) is at that point in the flight.
4 Likes
They have admitted it themselves, feck all they can do when TOAL happens outside of their property. Carry on as normal and I hope they feed this info to all their staff.
Too many charities morph into businesses these days.
1 Like
National Trust admits it can’t ban drone flights over its land
Bear in mind, there is a the legal aspect and being a PITA aspect which makes it harder for the rest of us, and could probably end up with something that is actually illegal to fly.
Unless I can TOAL in a remote place/time that is unlikely to get people wound up I tend not to bother. I’m not that desperate to have an argument. They just dont get any money from me.
The EH staff ive dealt with are aware of the policy and arent idiots about it.
They can do something if CAA rules are being broken regardless of TOAL (and operating, not just toal) location which is fine.
The main rule break i see are people flying way beyond VLOS to get at a property thats in the middle of a lot of private land.
I dont have an issue with their website, it complies with the law, admits you dont need to do what they ask but also, sensibly asks if you DO fly, try to do it in a way that minimises disruption, danger and so on by doing it outside hours etc.
NT can still FOAD though. Repeatedly.
2 Likes
haha, not heard that one for ages.
You seem to have a more underlying issue with the NT that obviously goes well beyond drones. 
Indeed. Not sure if its their habit of taking previously free/cheap car parks and turning them into paid and huge fees or whether its their attitude to photography and photographers rights actively blocking commercial shots of untouched natural coastline they own. Or 100s of other things.
Cant swear on here so ill just leave it as ----s.
1 Like
The NT was established for the benifit of all of the UK but they seem to work for their own agenda. It’s like most charities, the bigger they get they lose focus of the original idea, and internal politics become destructive.
2 Likes
Just come back from the Lakes, where huge swaiths of land is owned by NT. I’d like to see them try and order a hiker off their land if caught TOALing from it! 
In terms of the parking charge thing, virtually every view point along the A591, amongst others, now have a parking meter. Min charge of £4 for taking one picture (unless of course your hanging out the car window as you pass very slowly)!
1 Like
Many have said the RBL have gone down the same avenue.
1 Like