Sensible approach

Check out this report on a nuisance drone flyer and how the police handled it.


A far more effective solution than being dragged through the courts.

I think it also highlights that technically you can fly a Min2, or similar, around your neighbourhood, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea. I’ve had my Mini2 for a few weeks but I haven’t flown it further than the end of my drive or higher than the chimney stack on my house as I have no wish to be the cause of any upset.


Well handled. For those not on this forum or who have bought the drone and just flown with no education, this is probably a very good approach. There will always be those that will never learn though.


I think the main thing when flying in residential areas is not to be a dick

Since the revised regulations came in I’ve flown my Mini 2 from my driveway maybe ten times, either to get unobstructed pics of the sunset in which case I go straight up to 110m and straight down when finished filming, or for a general flight around the area when I again go straight up to 100m+ before moving off so as to minimise noise nuisance, then descend only when back over my house

1 Like

I suppose this only works if both victim and offender agree to meet which requires both the drone pilot and the neighbour to be sensible adults. Unfortunately, as we all know, there are quite a number of drone pilots and neighbours out there that are not sensible.
Let’s hope more police forces are prepared to operate as peacemakers employing the gently gently approach :+1: :+1: :+1:

1 Like

Yes i fly off my front up high so hardly hear drone have taz round then bring it down over my head and unless battery low. Only when no one is around.


Fortunately for the pilot this was before the new regs came in. If he posted on social media and didn’t have the req’d qualifications it could have been a different situation.

My take away is that

The man, from Swindon, was identified when officers from the Constabulary’s rural crime team traced technical information on the internet

I’m all for ‘we are not the drone police’ on this forum but note that there are people who post clearly illegally acquired media and that if they were short sighted enough to believe that just because their fellow pilots don’t call it out, leaving a digital trail on the internet of their activity puts them up for criminal investigation in the event that a complaint is made at the time or after the fact. I’m thinking of night flights, filming or photographing residential and other congested locations, and in close proximity to legally protected parties/bystanders. Exif data, image resolutions (proving in some cases that the drone in use was not a sub-250g device), flight logs etc are all forensically demonstrable in law and the writing has been on the wall since the internet came into being.

Well, what did he do? Buzz his back door?

I do get your point and it winds me up that we often either condone or turn a blind eye to illegal activity however…

It’s big leap to assume that the footage is acquired illegally. There’s nothing illegal about flying at night, nor about filming or photographing residential or congested locations. From a piece of footage you cannot tell what (if any) qualifications the pilot has, what permissions were sought and obtained or anything else. I’d bet a few quid that it’s hard for the layman to accurately judge distance or height from on the ground and especially from footage. As part of my PfCO flight test they asked me to fly vertically up to 100 feet and then go 100 feet away - without looking at my screen or controller. I’m not sure any of us would get that right. The point was to show just how difficult judging these things is.

That’s a fair call about qualifications. I’d not considered.

Also, I was under the apparently wrong impression that flight was restricted to a short period before and a short period after sun up/down. I’m now reading. Thanks.

1 Like