I’m still not clear even having read ATMUA2021 because of the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHuMwoamCts where the officers appear to say the pilot/ any person in possession of a drone must identify THEMSELVES, not the operator (8:41 9:46 11:05 16:00 16:18) which is not always the case. Hypothetical situation: I am flying a sub 250g drone with a camera (Open A1) in class G airspace, therefore no permanent or temporary flight restrictions in place. My BELIEF is that as the flyer I have no ‘competency’ to prove ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(1). However if asked to land the drone I HAVE to do so to prove that the drone is a sub 250g drone (I’d HAVE to do this to prove that there is no competency requirement). Having landed, the police officer may inspect the drone (once powered down) only, not the controller (side note, I understand that having the wide angle lens attached to a dji mini pro4 puts it in Open A3 meaning you could be breaking the law and must have a flyer id so this affects the competency requirement and hence requirement to identify). Having done this the officer will have the drone OPERATOR id but I see nothing about them being able to record it or not. I see nothing in ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(2) that requires me to identify myself as that operator but if requested I would have to provide additional OPERATOR’s details (ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(2)(2)), but see later on the timescale, so that they can confirm the legitimacy of that id. (by default does not that not imply that they must record the operator id?) ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(2)(4)(b) does not apply. Onto ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(5), I have no idea what this requires (can anyone clarify?). ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(6&7) only applies if the officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that a provision of the ANO 2016 is or was being contravened, so no identification needs to be produced if not. ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9(8), I’ve seen youtube videos where people do not abide by this and are therefore committing an offence(?) and could therefore have their details required to be disclosed. ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 10 says that any details in sections 1-7 may be produced upto 7 days later at a nominated police station. However because the officer may inspect the drone they will at least have the operator id anyway. The fact that I might be both the unmanned drone pilot AND the operator is immaterial and does not have to be disclosed, if this is wrong, please point to the specific requirement. The identity of the unmanned drone pilot does not have to be disclosed at all in this case, again if this is wrong, please point to the specific requirement. There may be other requirements to identify based upon suspicion of committing other criminal offences eg breaking privacy laws. Can someone point out where my understanding is incorrect and confirm the officers are correct?
I have never got the point of why people don’t want to share details with the police - yeah I get it that its within your rights to not disclose but to me that just seems like your already in the wrong or up to something wrong and your just hoping that being awkward will just get you off as the copper gets fed up. I don’t think I have ever seen a cop just give up because he didn’t get what he asked for. But being open / honest with cops you seem to get a better reaction from them because your being cool with them they will be cool with you.
Cops no matter who they are will not know every rule around any subject be it drones or whatever but it is up to them to prove your in the wrong and if you can ( you should be able to ) prove your in the right then all is cool - and even if you have slightly crossed the line a little bit they are humans and your likely to get told off but its hardly the crime of the century.
Very much also doubt they will know that a wide lens on a mini drone will take it over its weight limit and I doubt they will go to the bother of putting it on scales to find its a few grams over - unless your being awkward and give them reason to get picky about stuff like that.
My personal view with dealing with the cops and it has worked 100% in my favor the few times I have had dealings with them is be open / honest and cool with them and they will be with you.
yeah this cop is some what in the wrong as he should have spoken to his manager and asked him into an office but then again why not give your ID and that whole convo would have been over in like 2 mins and not the 5 mins it took about the if’s and buts about the whole thing.
The cop is trying to do his job.
I got arrested once in my school uniform as I matched the description of someone that the police were looking for ( granted not in my school uniform ) but my height / hair / build etc was what they were looking for and they had a suspected first name for this person they were looking for. I had items on me with my name ( library card / cash card ) and within a few mins it was sorry and off you go - easy going - yeah I was scared - I was like 16 at the time but the cops will find out who you are at some point.
Also looking at the video from Geeksvana as posted by the OP the states that the rules around ID are different if you have a drone and that you should ID yourself when asked.
Legally, the police can ask you to identify yourself (ie ask your name and address) You don’t have to tell them though. If they suspect ( or have reasonable suspicion a criminal act has been committed) they can arrest you. As far as I know, if you’re flying your drone within the law, then the onus would be on the police officer to prove his suspicion. There’s no legal right to demand some form of identification.
I got lost halfway through reading your post. Like most, you are massively massively overthinking it. 99% of polioe officers will have absolutely no idea about drones, or the law around them. Your chance of this happening is almost nil. If you are going to a known site where drones regularly fly and it is an issue that a few of the local officers have dealt with before then they may be more clued up, but in general you are not going to have these issues. The police do have specific powers in relation to identification, requirement to land, inspect and also potentially seize equipment but these would only be relevant if you were doing something very naughty.
You talking about Scotland? That’s not true in the UK. Drone pilots must present operator ID, flyer ID, and proof of competency when requested by police - this by default will identify the person. If someone refuses then there are the grounds for suspicion of an offence whereby you are obliged to identify yourself, if you refuse then you can be arrested in order to verify your name and address. So refusal to identify yourself just leads to the same ending. Also police can question operators about flight activities and demand access to technical flight data for compliance verification, but again, 99% of police won’t know they can do this.
TLDR; “I watched a Geeksvana video ‘explaining’ the powers the police have over drone pilots and I am now very excited at the prospect of telling the first police officer who asks me my name to go **** themselves… what are my legal legs to stand on?”
I do have a dislike of officious twats, regardless of their profession but in the case of drones…
Given the bad rep we get, especially in light of all these auditor videos and the uncertainty of future regulation changes. I can’t see the issue with cooperating with the police if i were ever approached.
I might not like it but, assuming the flight is legal the best way to get rid of them is to play nice and watch them scurry away.
I’m reminded of all those american traffic stop videos where it’s obvious the authorities will use any excuse to escalate the situation and turn what should be a 5 minute conversation into a massive drama.
There’s nothing to say the operator is the flyer, or the flyer is the operator, or any which way round you want it. However, if you are engaged flying a drone by police, it would be reasonable for them to suspect you are the operator, and therefore they would be able to direct you to land it, provide ID as the suspected operator or at least tell them who the operator is to contact them and verify the details e.t.c.
Sub 250g (as per the thread) no Flyer ID or proof or competency necessary and the Operator could be your employer, so this wouldn’t identify you (only them)
Doesn’t this part of the thread here assume that all police have any accurate idea of the regs etc. Op ID’s, flyer ID’s etc
If i were an average plod. I would assume the dude with the controller is the dude that needs to cooperate. Not an unreasonable position for an average plod imo.
True, but all I am saying is that there is potential for them to go down another route to achieve the required outcome, namely - suspect you of being the operator and require you to identify yourself to that effect, meaning failing to comply could render you liable to arrest. But as I said the chances of the police getting involved and knowing the rules are almost zero anyway, and as with all things policing, you will get a different outcome depending on who attends and deals, as there is no consistency.
That’s exactly how it is. And I would encourage anyone brave enough to decide to not co-operate and get clever about things to do so, and then post here afterwards letting us know how that goes for them.
I’m not asking about practicalities nor suggesting that one should be awkward or evasive, but am asking if I understand what the law ACTUALLY requires, as even the drone specialist police in the video appear to have it wrong.
This started because I was looking for info about identification in guidance: Drone code, A2 CoC materials etc but couldn’t find it so started googling (yeah I know google google google) and found the gov.uk pages and then the video quoted which appears at odds.
I’m not asking about ‘playing nice or not’ but querying if my understanding of the law, particularly ATMUA 2021 SCHEDULE 9, is wrong. I totally agree with the ‘play nice’ and they’ll probably go away approach. I’d expect them to get suspicious of me like I do with my kids if they are being evasive and get more and more questioning and a pain
(I have in circumstances in the past not been hammered by traffic cops who like most other cops in my experience tend to be reasonable when you’re reasonable with them. I have no reason to suspect this would be any different re drones. As the guys say on the vid they are not ‘out to get us’)
There appear to be a number of drone operators out there who have youtube channels and appear to go out of their way to antagonise the police just for views which does not do of us any favours. Some often get even the simplest drone laws wrong .. don’t even get started with some of the misunderstanding about GDPR and privacy they spout!.
Based on this thread I now have my doubts if we all know the difference between ‘operator’ and ‘flyer/pilot’ (some sarcasm) and the requirements to produce appropriate identification or a drone in our possession if requested.
At the end of the day I believe the better we know the laws the better we can play nice within them. Mavericks (not the drone) just have the effect in my opinion of encouraging stricter controls which can be a bad thing.
Appears I accidently poked a hornets’ nest here.
Sorry
