UK Drone Regulation

BigT · December 22, 2016, 10:12:32 AM

With regard to the statement regarding a drone qualification, I suggest that this is another case of a deal being done before publication. The BMFA have already designed and implicated an FPV extension qualification for 2017. I would encourage all FPV fliers regardless of affiliation and feelings toward the BMFA to lobby the BMFA regarding the extension. The test and criterion can be seen at

http://achievements.bmfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/FPV-Extension-MR-and-FW-2017.pdf

I have already fired off several e mails to the scheme controller

http://achievements.bmfa.org/contact-the-asrc/power-silent-flight-national-scheme-controller

Mainly the test is an extension to fixed wing and multicopter BPC , A, B, C Certs. In particular it is the requirement for the model to have no GPS installed, but self levelling is allowed, no autoland or launch and a compulsory FPV landing. It's just aimed at a bog standard club flier who throws a cheap camera and vtx on a powered glider or 250 quad. Not representative of the serious FPV set up.

Please remember that the BMFA are most likely to be the agency that ends up being responsible for implementing the government schemes.

FPVSteve · December 22, 2016, 12:05:10 PM

Good luck finding a drone pilot who's flying multiple kilometres from the launch point across open fields.

All these regulations are going to do is drive people under the radar which, funnily enough, puts them in the same league as those who would commit nefarious acts in the first place.

Oh well, bang goes another hobby. It was cool.

Loopdreams · December 22, 2016, 12:32:10 PM

The worst of it is I think it's all for nothing. I think the entire notion that the commercial drone sector will soon be worth however many billions they projected is utter, utter hogwash. No doubt some dweeb has charted the recent growth, extrapolated out and seen flashing pound signs. And there will be a growing industry but all I can really see are fairly niche applications. This idea that the sky will be filled with delivery drones is idiotic. Their capacity compared to a van is truly pathetic and before very long at all we'll see fleets of electric powered driverless delivery vehicles that will make the whole idea all but redundant excpet for those few cases where someone really needs a very small item very quickly and they live or work somewhere that a drone could feasibly land. Just not seeing it at all.

Gundummy · December 22, 2016, 01:04:41 PM

QuoteTheir capacity compared to a van is truly pathetic an

There's already the concept of putting rotors onto Isocontainers that can way point themselves out to deliver in remote areas etc Miltary applications are booming also in other areas hence the big money.

FPVSteve · December 22, 2016, 02:36:41 PM

Does anyone else not see the silliness of this though?

We're not allowed to fly Phantoms over people because it's dangerous (although we have full control)

BUT

It's fine for Amazon to send large, fully-autonomous craft not only through the air, but LANDING in peoples' gardens completely unsupervised where there may be a) animals, b) children, c) unseen hazards ... and not only that, take off - again completely unsupervised - with the possibility of some excited kids around it because "hey!!! DRONE!!!"

It's bullshit!

Anyone who is using the safety argument for these drone regulations has to have an agenda.

electrotor · December 22, 2016, 02:39:55 PM

Quote from: BigT on December 22, 2016, 10:12:32 AM
Please remember that the BMFA are most likely to be the agency that ends up being responsible for implementing the government schemes.

I cannot see this happening for several reasons :
1. The BMFA has no legal powers and is not a government agency
2. The BMFA would have to change completely and utterly in its purpose, structure and responsibilities in order for this to happen
3. The BMFA is only one of several associations representing model flying in the UK
4. The BMFA can only properly represent its members - the A stands for Association not All
5. The BMFA is funded by its members and not the government

FPVSteve · December 22, 2016, 02:41:28 PM

Seems to me the BMFA is at as much risk as anyone else in this fiasco.

electrotor · December 22, 2016, 02:50:14 PM

The problem and as I see it the crux of the matter is the inability or unwillingness to differentiate between recreational unmanned and commercial unmanned. Until very recently this was never a problem and it needn't necessarily be a problem in future if we can just have an informed evolution of perfectly sound existing regulation. There is nothing wrong with CAP 658. Its biggest amendment in recent years was to add a section on FPV, written by our very own Simon Dale (thank you again Simon) and I can see no reason for radical changes to address the perception of a problem which, in the grand scale of things, barely exists.

Loopdreams · December 22, 2016, 08:16:00 PM

Quote from: Gundummy on December 22, 2016, 01:04:41 PM
There's already the concept of putting rotors onto Isocontainers that can way point themselves out to deliver in remote areas etc Miltary applications are booming also in other areas hence the big money.

But that's not really relevant when we're discussing regulation of civilian drones here in the UK and I just don't really see this supposed vast potential. Moving things around on wheels is almost always going to be more cost effective and there are comparatively few things that need to get anywhere so fast that this method of delivery is going to be so important. There are applications like Police surveillance but again that will be quite a small industry. Added to which the potential is further limited by the fact that people simply wouldn't want to see the sky filled with commercial drones.

Gundummy · December 23, 2016, 09:07:00 AM

Loop dreams..you brought up the discussion about delivery capability and financial viability.... I was highlighting the fact that I do indeed see the market being worth a fortune and that delivery potentially is increasing. Especially in the military industry.

The civilian drone industry covers a lot !! Not just hobby enthusiasts

stevec · December 23, 2016, 09:31:40 AM

I think the main problem is that companies like amazon want to be able to control the first layer of airspace, 0-400feet AGL. they have already "offered" to manage this airspace on behalf of the CAA who promptly told them where to poke it, but for the delivery model to work they need a corridor available to them for delivery. if they are going to land it stands to reason that this must extend from ground level.

this is all well and good, but they have realised there are users of this airspace. Us lowly modellers. we don't pay for this nor do we have such high tech available to us for cheap enough prices to make it viable (ADS-b etc...) so the easiest thing to do is make it so hard for the modellers to fly legally that they either give up or go underground at the risk of an annual example being made of someone in the media.

until sense and avoid tech comes a long way further than it is today this will be the recurring problem. there is no way with the current tech that drones can integrate into the NAS so they will have to go for the softer target.

/Steve

rob.thomson · December 23, 2016, 10:26:22 AM

Quote from: stevec on December 23, 2016, 09:31:40 AM
I think the main problem is that companies like amazon want to be able to control the first layer of airspace, 0-400feet AGL. they have already "offered" to manage this airspace on behalf of the CAA who promptly told them where to poke it, but for the delivery model to work they need a corridor available to them for delivery. if they are going to land it stands to reason that this must extend from ground level.

this is all well and good, but they have realised there are users of this airspace. Us lowly modellers. we don't pay for this nor do we have such high tech available to us for cheap enough prices to make it viable (ADS-b etc...) so the easiest thing to do is make it so hard for the modellers to fly legally that they either give up or go underground at the risk of an annual example being made of someone in the media.

until sense and avoid tech comes a long way further than it is today this will be the recurring problem. there is no way with the current tech that drones can integrate into the NAS so they will have to go for the softer target.

/Steve

All a fair point.

But let's be honest... They could fly into a bird?

A cricket ball?

Plenty of things in that airspace.

I would hope that the likes of the caa will work towards a suitable resolution.

Time will tell!

In the mean time... My sub 250g quads are an absolute blast!

FPVSteve · December 23, 2016, 10:36:16 AM

Am I the only hobbyist who, while loving drones / aircraft etc, doesn't fancy the air being full of Amazon delivery bots?

And can you imagine the Yodel ones? lol

BlueFlyer · December 23, 2016, 12:12:15 PM

Quote from: Steve W on December 23, 2016, 10:36:16 AM
Am I the only hobbyist who, while loving drones / aircraft etc, doesn't fancy the air being full of Amazon delivery bots?

And can you imagine the Yodel ones? lol

I don't fancy the idea either. As far as I can see, it's just a gimmick right now. There will be a big list of eligibility criteria a customer has to meet in order to qualify for "drone delivery" and I certainly can't see them offering it for free.

electrotor · December 23, 2016, 12:43:20 PM

Quote from: BlueFlyer on December 23, 2016, 12:12:15 PM
I don't fancy the idea either. As far as I can see, it's just a gimmick right now. There will be a big list of eligibility criteria a customer has to meet in order to qualify for "drone delivery" and I certainly can't see them offering it for free.

I think we have to be careful here not to fixate on Amazon Prime Air just as we should not fixate on DJI Phantom users for bringing about scare stories of downing airliners. Whilst it may be convenient to have immediate delivery of a pair of trainers (see Jeremy Clarkson's tongue in cheek video) it is NOT an emergency, NOT life threatening, NOT economical, NOT possible everywhere, NOT the best use of resources, NOT environmentally friendly, etc. etc. I do however see a value in using more UAVs for survey work (agricultural/commercial/industrial). emergency services, disaster relief and situation monitoring. However these uses would be more controlled and less likely to fill the lower airspace levels for simple convenience.