THE NEW UAS REGULATIONS – WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE?

[FPVSteve]

The fact you've pasted a thousand line wall of text is testament to the fact that the CAA has completely lost the dressing room. It's a farce, and everyone knows it.

Here's a more realistic scenario:
Joe FPVer knows about the rules, but is not sure which "class" his aircraft is in and simply wants to fly a few hundred yards up the beach.

Does he:
a) consult the appropriate PDFs on his phone, cross-referencing paragraph 1c section 9 with exemption 4615 paragraph 4 to make sure he's okay (as long as it's on a Tuesday and he's wearing a blue hat)
or
b) simply fly for 20 mins, get his video and go home happy. In other words, chancing it, in the knowledge that 99.999999% of the time he'll get away with it, cause no harm at all and interact with noone.

There's the "problem" with the regulations.

[mike407]

The fact you've pasted a thousand line wall of text is testament to the fact that the CAA has completely lost the dressing room. It's a farce, and everyone knows it.

Here's a more realistic scenario:
Joe FPVer knows about the rules, but is not sure which "class" his aircraft is in and simply wants to fly a few hundred yards up the beach.

Does he:
a) consult the appropriate PDFs on his phone, cross-referencing paragraph 1c section 9 with exemption 4615 paragraph 4 to make sure he's okay (as long as it's on a Tuesday and he's wearing a blue hat)
or
b) simply fly for 20 mins, get his video and go home happy. In other words, chancing it, in the knowledge that 99.999999% of the time he'll get away with it, cause no harm at all and interact with noone.

There's the "problem" with the regulations.

Steve not disagreeing with you.

The regulations are written in the style of regulations, so you need a consultant to understand them. Ok for big business , not so good for the man on the street.

The other way is to be retired and bored and spend a week , reading and re reading them and each time you find another gotcha.


CAP 2004 to 2012 are the simplified versions but they don't seem to agree with CAP 722 which  is the authority or is it?

I asked a question to my art 16 provider, who gave their opinon and enclosed the CAAs opinion and they didn't agree!!!!!

Somewhere else there was about who was going to raise the first airprox report of 2021, because he was lucky he had a fault in his drone and crashed into the back of his shed he missed the overflight by seconds.

How many reportable occurrences were in that one instance?

The issue is it isn't national rules, it's international rules and it isn't going to change. There is an international road map and every body is following it. Hobby / Sport / recreational flyers are in the way as they are unpredictable, especially those that build their own flying machines.

How long before ART 16 permissions are withdrawn and we all fly safely under Open A3.

Your example will "get away with it", those that fly in clubs or at meets organised on line Will be monitored .

An other wall of text with the fines and who is authorised to touch your plan.

ANO 2010 amended 2020

It is primarily aimed at creating criminal offences for breaches of the new regulations, but it also ensures that there is no conflicting regulation within the text of the ANO.

Article 265B – offences: contravention of the UAS Implementing Regulation – remote pilot
Key point: If remote pilots do not comply with the applicable remote pilot requirements of the UAS Implementing Regulation (UAS IR), then an offence has been committed.

Article 265C – offences: registration of certified unmanned aircraft
Key point: This article simply states that if a certified unmanned aircraft has not been registered, but is flown, then its owner has committed an offence.

Article 265F – penalties
Key point: This article sets out the penalty levels (fines) for any offences committed under articles 265A-265E.
The general approach for setting the level of fines that has been taken is: ▪ For 'minor administrative' offences – Level 2 (up to £500)
▪ For other 'administrative offences' – Level 3 (up to £1000)
▪ For 'operational/in flight' offences – Level 4 (up to £2500)
Additionally, for offences relating to flights conducted entirely outside of the framework of the UAS IR (see the references to paragraph 1 of articles 265A and 265B above) – an unlimited fine in England and Wales, and a fine up to the statutory maximum in Scotland and Northern Ireland will apply.
This approach equates to the levels of fines that were set in the ANO (at schedule 13) prior to the....

CAA's power to prevent aircraft flying
257.—(1) If it appears to the CAA or an authorised person that any aircraft is intended or likely to be flown in any of the circumstances specified in paragraph (2), the CAA or that authorised person may direct in accordance with paragraph (3).

Last one - you comment no one is touching my aircraft with out a warrant

If paragraph (1) applies, the CAA or that authorised person may direct the operator or the pilot in command of the aircraft not to permit the aircraft to make the particular flight or any other flight of such description as may be specified in the direction, until the direction has been revoked by the CAA or by an authorised person.
December 2020 Page 25

CAP2013 Annex A - Consolidated ANO UAS Articles Annex A - Consolidated ANO UAS Articles (as applicable from 11pm 31 December 2020)
(4) If the CAA or an authorised person has directed under paragraph (3), the CAA or an authorised person may take such steps as are necessary to detain the aircraft.
(5) For the purposes of this article, the CAA or any authorised person may enter and inspect aircraft.

Key words authorised person. So easily subcontracted to third party with mandate to generate cash.


So again who wants to be the club safety officer.

Who wants to publish there ad hoc flying locations time.


Bed time reading

http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/Air%20Navigation%20Order%202020%20Amendment%20Guidance%20for%20unmanned%20aircraft%20system%20users%20(CAP2013).pdf

[mike407]

After a week of confusion and lots of reading. I might understand this better.

The legal Document for UAV flying is

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/947 of 24 May 2019 on the rules and procedures for the operation of unmanned aircraft (Text with EEA relevance)

ANO (2020) - defined the criminal  offences in relation to the document above.

Cap 722
Cap 2004 - 2012
Art 16 are guidances from the legal document above

So just because you are complying with ART 16,  Cap722 you may not be complying with the legal document that at the top, because

The ANO refer to the master document and not CAP 722

I finally found the legal reason for sub 250 privately built UAV to have a speed of less than 19m/s to fly in Open A1. It's in the legal document