UK "Drone" registration on the way?

[scrw.]

Unsure where to post this one, could be in the Scale or Photography sections, however.

Seems that HMG have decided to look at drones requiring registration & users to have to take exams to fly them.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/drones-to-be-re...

They haven't defined what a drone it, but I could be in the situation where I have to take an exam to fly my DJI Phantom quad rotor and limited to 400ft but can fly my 6ft-ish wings Wot4-XL which comes in at 5kg-ish and can travel alot faster/further/higher with less onboard safety in terms of sensors/gps etc that my Phantom has. Safety my arse, easy tax on a growing hobby more like.

Good video from NZ on the subject here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfrhIwp1L8w&yt...

(mods feel free to move to more suitable section)

[scrw.]

I expect it is the thin end of the wedge. But from a safety of electronics pov, modern radio stuff is much better than old FM systems I used even 15 years ago

[scrw.]

They seem to be focusing on "drones" so quad copter stuff. So my Phantom can't do anything more dodgy than the Morley 300 helicopter (old RC types will remember them) could do in the 90's. The big improvement is on video/FPV stuff I admit, but licencing stuff never stops dodgy people doing dogy stuff, see handgun laws for example.

[scrw.]

Murph7355 said:

I was thinking today that maybe a better solution would be the authorities using similar technologies to actively protect the airspace they are concerned with (airports, prisons etc). And perhaps introduce a tax on these things to fund the "killer drones"

I think DJI is looking at that or it actually may already be a feature to stop over flying airfields. Certainly I can limit my phantom to distance from transmitter & overall height.

[scrw.]

So would all the people who accept this is a good solution be happy to have a gps speed controller installed on their cars? Its the same blunt solution, as a result of a minority not towing the line. FYI I am insured and follow the caa drone code, which is more restrictive that flying my none "drone" r/c stuff.

[scrw.]

Its not a manageable solution though, tossers will still do what they feel like and people following the current guidelines will be penalised

[scrw.]

Evanivitch said:

And those that are tossers now and continue to be tossers can now be traced, prosecuted and prevented from repeating.

Currently, the chances of catching a drone operator is slim unless they put a Return to Sender note on their device.

Those following the current guidelines will be inconvenienced initially,but otherwise business as usual.

How will that happen though? Likelyhood of a scrote who wants to get drugs into a prison or any other ilegal activity registering is zero, hence not actually useful. It like asking someone to register an ilegal firearm. Registering at the shop won't work when you can buy over the internet

[scrw.]

Would be worth looking at the results of the Scotish air gun registration scheme started recently, has the stopped idiots shoots cats etc? Doubt it very much.

[scrw.]

GetCarter said:

It seems some in here don't know how drones and their software work.

If a registration scheme is brought in, then the drone software & controller will not fly the drone unless it is registered. There will be some work arounds, but the GPS and visuals will not be able to be seen by the 'pilot'. So it will have to be registered. It's very easy for the software to be configured so that registration will be necessary before flight is available.

There are plenty of open source software to get around this. Also, and this is the bit that is my biggest gripe, the BALP page talks of traditional R/C planes as "drones", they have been flying for decades without issue and only now are called "drones". There is no way of controlling R/C planks like you could with say DJI products, they are so different and don't have GPS or sensors built in. The whole airborne R/C hobby is being tarred with the same brush and rushed, ill informed regulation will have unexpected consequences.

Edited by scrw. on Sunday 23 July 16:43

[scrw.]

Evanivitch said:

What do you mean by a GPS barrier?

You can create no fly zones based on GPS coordinates, say 3 miles around a major airfield

[scrw.]

Oakey said:

Shortly afterwards a helicopter took off from nearby and flew straight over the park, right over where the drone had been.

So the Heli went over a park at 100ft?! More people have been killed by helis falling from the sky than drones however, but a park is totaly the wrong place to be flying any R/C stuff.

[scrw.]

However flying 10ft from a cliff face as you decend from the top to 400ft from the valley below is going to be in airspace unused by other aircraft

[scrw.]

First time I have seen mention of a date for this.

"From 30 November 2019, operators of drones between 250g and 20kg will be required to register and drone pilots take an online competency test."

[scrw.]

"The proposed charge is £16.50 per drone operator on an annual basis. If there is a significant over-recovery on top of the scheme's running cost then we may reduce the charge over subsequent years."

really....I doubt that

[scrw.]

https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/Token/Info/Article...

https://consultations.caa.co.uk/finance/drone-regi...

[scrw.]

I won't be registering, my planes are insured and have my name and address inside in case the worst happens, which is more traceable than the CAA's effort

[scrw.]

Well a new £9 a year tax paid like a good citizen, still cannot see much benefit to this.

[scrw.]

one thing however, I had forgotten about the 30th Nov date, if it wasn't for this thread I would be flying ileagally next month, not seen any advertising about this at all, so many people are going to get caught out by this.

[scrw.]

catso said:

Surely the £9 a year is the 'benefit' as far as the state is concerned?

soon to increase, no doubt...

Well indeed, I wonder how many will sign up though, versus the cost of running the system. And the value of the system is...? People who play by the rules (drone code) are the ones who will pay, not the problem fliers.

[scrw.]

ash73 said:

It's worth joining the BMFA if you fly model aircraft or drones, at the very least to benefit from the indemnity insurance.

BMFA members don't have to be registered until 31 Jan 2020, it's an opt-in at annual renewal, and you can skip the online test if you have a BMFA qualification (e.g. A/B certificate).

Already am in the BMFA, test itself is not dificult although 2 questions are vague (flying in snow should you be more concerned about losing visability of drone or fingers getting cold...and another one where the correct answer was not actually following the drone code).

Interesting how you can stop model aircraft from breaching the 120m ceiling though, easy enough with a drone via software, but a basic flying plank with a dumb transmitter?