UK DFT Consultation feedback

[chris-berry]

No doubt you've seen the headlines today about the registration of 'drones' by the U.K. Government.

Having read some of the key points there is intention to limit everything that moves to 400ft and that registration may not be needed if in a club environment.

Does anyone (Rob Buckley or Tony Hooper) know if these proposals are final, subject to formal legislation or amendment, or are they ongoing..best intentions.. until EASA have published their findings? I'm particularly keen to know the situation re gliding, as 400ft is nothing for gliders. Does anyone know if exemptions could be applied for, or is it too early to know?

Thanks
Chris Berry

[Rob Buckley]

The Department for Transport today published their response to the consultation that was held earlier in the year on the use of drones.

What is disappointing is the level of response. Of the 678 responses the DfT received, only 213 were from model flyers, which is somewhere in the region of 0.6% of the model flyers in this country who are the member of a model flying association.

What is positive is that the DfT recognise the long and safe history of organised model flying (and for ‘club’ read ‘association’)-

'The Government will work with model aircraft flying clubs to examine ways in which it may be possible to exempt members of model aircraft flying clubs with adequate safety cultures and practices from certain elements of registration and other educational requirements, or where their club will be permitted to undertake regulatory requirements on their behalf. Flyers of model aircraft who are not members of a club, or are members of a club not deemed to have adequate standards will, however, not be excluded from registration or other requirements. '

While there is also a stated desire to amend the Air Navigation Order 2016 to ‘ban all drones of 7kg or less in weight flying above 400ft or 122m’, the flying of model aircraft as today over 400ft should be part of a UK Operational Authorisation that will be negotiated with the CAA when the EASA requirements come into force.

While this response is a statement of intent, rather than final policy, the LMA will, in conjunction with the other UK model flying associations, continue to work with the DfT & the CAA to make sure that model flying is not negatively impacted by the government’s understandable desire to not have a very nasty accident caused by inappropriate use of Drones.

[chris-berry]

Thanks Rob.
Interestingly the draft EASA regs state that the CAA could amend height restrictions and zone certain areas, perhaps through NOTAMs? etc if flying in a model flying in a club. I notice this is missing from the DFT paper.
Perhaps the DFT will be happy with that approach, but don't want to publicise it to the masses and the fake news brigade?

Hopefully common sense will prevail, many thanks to all involved for your continued efforts.

[Rob Buckley]

The EASA proposed rules would require an Operational Authorisation to be issued by the national Competent Authority (most likely the CAA) for model flying under the umbrella of a model flying association.

This could potentially include an exemption to a blanket 400 ft height limit, but it wouldn't by by NOTAM, they are intended for temporary airspace changes/notifications, and not generic repeated operations.

The DfT response is what the government is intending to do in general terms about drones, not the details of how things will be worked in conjunction with EASA regulations of every unmanned aircraft under 150Kg.

[Paul Savage 1568]

What is the official definition of a "Drone"?

Surely every single radio controlled aircraft in the world is effectively an unmanned drone of sorts. Does a radio controlled aircraft have to have 4 motors and look every bit like a DJI Phantom to be branded a "Drone". The reaper doesn't but it is called a "Drone"

If I put a camera on my electric Wot 4 does that make it and unmanned camera drone which requires me to have a commercial pilots licence to operate. Will I need to register it. Will we all need to register our unmanned model aircraft.

If I put a gyro enabled flight controller on one of my aircraft so it can fly unaided does that make it a "Drone"

Registration of all so called " Drones" that weigh about the same as a mobile phone upwards sounds like an expensive, unworkable and un-policeable waste of legislation to me. I can just see the bad guys using their radio controlled aircraft to drop drugs into a prison taking the time to register their "Drone" first.

[Rob Buckley]

A 'Drone' is an unmanned aircraft, and seeing as the ones we fly are 'small' in the grand scheme of things compared to an A380...

“Small unmanned aircraft” means any unmanned aircraft, other than a balloon or a kite, having a mass of not more than 20kg without its fuel but including any articles or equipment installed in or attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight;

If a model has a camera attached to it that's not used for flying it (the camera on an FPV machine for instance) but is being used for capturing video...

“a small unmanned surveillance aircraft” means a small unmanned aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data acquisition.

As members of the LMA, BMFA, SAA etc, we are already registered as unmanned aircraft operators and have insurance, so what we will be doing is making sure there is as little impact on existing modellers as possible.

[brucepeter2007]

It is such a shame that every aspect of our sport is under threat- be it from noise or hysteria. note the latter being brought about by the few irresponsible people who won't register or have any regard for the law anyway.
Our club (Bartons Point Model Flying Club) has just finished it's "Flying Spectacular" which the club puts on each year as a free event for the public to see what our sport is all about with top pilots attending and a lot of time is given up by our members for free to generated good will.
I suspect all the clubs out there promote good practice and safe flying already and the current laws that are around make it possible to prosecute anyone who flys anything in an unsafe manner so why do we need even more legislation I do not understand.
Even with the proposed registration only the responsible will register anyway so the people who break the rules now will still be out there so how will registration help matters.
All I seem to see is the few that ruin it for the many...
Am I missing something - as to read and fully understand the proposed legislation is beyond my understanding as I am no lawyer but a law abiding safe flying club member who belongs to a recognised club and governing body.
Regards Peter Bruce.

[Steve Mansell]

I think Peter has hit the nail on the head. I attended RIAT all four days last week, and every hour or so there was a public announcement reminding everyone that flying a "drone" near an active airfeild would be commiting a criminal offence.

There are already laws governing behavior of pilots of unmanned aircraft, but laws are only adhered to by the majority of law abiding people. The irrisponsible people who break the law, will continue to break the law no matter how many additional laws are brought in to address a percived problem.

I am sure the average bank robber doesn’t register his sawn off shotgun, but what we have is a register of law abiding gun owners, which is not much use untill one of them turns to the "dark side".

Cheers
Steve

[Rob Buckley]

T'was ever thus. Laws only apply to the law abiding. We have however a large group of lawmakers who need something to do, so the laws keep coming.

In this case, it has been decided that 'something' must be done, so we need to make sure that 'something' doesn't cause us too many problems.

I trust all the contributors to this thread responded to the DfT consultation? The figures suggest that around 6 LMA members responded, but I hope it was more.

[chris-berry]

As ever with laws, consultations and voting, apathy rules okay, until people realise what it means for them. I do a lot of consultation as part of my job and the numbers that respond are usually less than half of one percent, which is about the same level of response to the EASA and DFT consultations (yes I responded to both).

Having read the EASA consultation I think its far more positive than the DfT document. Lets hope common sense prevails. Even with registration etc the whole issue of enforcement is another thing all together. Currently over 7kg/15.5lbs in uncontrolled airspace are legally limited to 400ft. So everyone who flies an over 7kg model, which these days is not unusual at a club site has never flown above 400ft in all the years that has been in force, how has that been regulated and policed, particularly in the days before telemetry??

[Rob Buckley]

Despite what Facebook & the good folk of other model forums appear to believe, this is not the end of model flying as we know it.

All this decision is effectively saying is that the Government will be applying the EASA rules on unmanned aircraft when they come into force. The UK Government & the CAA are still keen to deal with us model flying organisations, and the aim is an Operational Authorisation for model flying under the Specific category, with effectively little change from today for model flying.

I've amended my initial statement above to make it clear that a blanket 400ft height limit, if introduced in the ANO, will all being well, be addressed by an Operational Authorisation for members of a model flying association to allow flight to higher altitudes as today.