Do excuse me, Iāve just recognised that drone as the same one that closed Heathrow Airport, what a silly boyā¦.
3 Likes
The same crap was pulled by CAA New Zealand when they published a picture of damage to a helicopter they claimed was caused by a collision with a drone. It was later disclosed that the damage was caused by a winch cable.
In the real world, what damage could a sub 250g drone do to an aircraft? prop, jet or otherwise? Not much is my guess. Otherwise the control tower 2 miles from my house would not let me fly my drone in the garden, let alone the fields that surround it. Their take off and landing approach is over my house, I kid you not when I say I can clearly see the pilot in the cockpit. They very occasionally ask me to cap height at 100ft when they have a lot of choppers buzzing about, donāt know why?
Serious question btw, Iām curious.
But thatās not the same picture they used, they posted a Dji Inspire 2 flying within the airport perimeterā¦.
One might think that the CAA are purposefully going out of their way to vilify recreational drone users. But for what reason? Surely itās not to clear the zero to 400foot airspace for fee paying commercial users and UTM providers? They wouldnāt do thatā¦ would they?
2 Likes
Such a cynical mind @Nidge 
Cynical? Moi?
2 Likes
aye i watched it live aand i thought yeaa this needs adressing and there using speculation to bring in these new rulesā¦
An interesting take on the new VLOS rules in this Geeksvana vid that dropped the other night. Callum Holland of the CAA was a guest along with Bruce and Graham. The interesting part is the apparent backtracking Callum does with regards to his previous interview with Shaun detailing his view on the new VLOS, and the insane orientation stance by the CAA .
As he also explains, there is British law, and there is the CAA guidelines within that law.
Have a watch, the group sesh in total is around 2hrs50 but the VLOS conversation is right at the front end.
I have watched over two nights bit match in one hit. Callum was trying to be one of us not the CAA as much as possible, what was a good point the document that came out showing drones next to planes he did agree this was crap and is going to ask if this can be removed and re published.
2 Likes
Iām trying to listen to this but unfortunately I always find Seanās livestreams difficult to listen to for any extended period of time, especially as he may feel he needs to reinterpret a panel members previous comment.
As for this pony and trap stuff about being able to determine a modelās orientation at all timesā¦ All Iāll say is bloody good luck to my spotter when Iām flying a five inch quad at 100+mph, with the ability to instantaneously change direction and orientation, sometimes multiple times a second. All hope would be lost if I then switched to one of my two or three inch quads, as by the CAA definition I would have to keep this high speed bullet within 20ft of my spotter, as beyond that, even if stationary, theyād not be able to determine its orientation, especially if itās a pure X config.
I maintain, these rules have been established by entities that have next to zero working knowledge of all the facets of this hobby. Even the Callum bloke admitted he has next to no experience of FPV, apparently because it makes him a bit liverish, so why should he have an input into what is safe and not safe to do while Iām under my goggles?
The argument that there needs to be something in place to prevent the first time user from causing death and destruction is weak. We accept that a high percentage of new drivers, especially under the age of 24, are going to be involved in some form of road traffic accident. Just a few days ago a young driver was killed and the passenger critically injured when they rolled a Lamborghini on the M62, and no other vehicle was involved. This story only garnered a couple of paragraphs on the BBCās red button text service.
The more I contemplate the more I realise that there is something that can break the speed of light, and that is critical thinking, but minus the critical bit.
Like it Nidgeš. And I do get the Shaun criticism, he does it to me too.
It was just interesting to see the difference in the 2 vids in question literally only 1 week apart.
Callum was adamant in vid 1 regarding the orientation of the drone, to which Shaun didnāt really challenge him, but on the second occasion in vid 2 he did . Callum seemed to me that he cracked and recognized it is just a BAD idea. Maybe I have read a little too much into it, but I thought it stood out like the proverbial sore thumb.
I for one will be continuing to fly which ever drone I have with me the same way as usual. 
1 Like
Join the club!
1 Like
Hang on, hang on a minute Iāve just picked up on that, so what your saying is Iām being policed
Or is it a typo error, because Iām sure not reading the pronunciation wrong, sorry for the late reply, I read somewhere { police we are not }.
Another mention of that picture
Heās right, what a load of tosh !!!
I watched that this afternoon, loved it and he is spot on
1 Like
I have raised a formal complaint on the CAA website, stating that I was disappointed that the CAA could include deceptive images that can only discredit recreational flyers.
I await their response!
5 Likes