Author Topic: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness  (Read 44662 times)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #300 on: 08 January, 2019, 08:39:47 pm »
Extending the known none-drone zone.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

andytheflyer

  • Andytheex-flyer.....
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #301 on: 09 January, 2019, 08:20:18 am »
Registration in the US was $5. (Then a bunch of lawsuits stopped the Gov't from requiring it, but I think it's coming back).
Similar system is coming here in Canada (announced tomorrow actually).
 FWIW, they had, at one point, a 9km (radius) exclusion around any airfield here, which basically made it impossible to fly anywhere. It's been reduced to 5km and will be reduced further to 3.5km.
Thx for the reminder - I'd forgotten where the FAA were up to on this.

In Canada, does the airfield prohibition include GA airfields?  There are a number of model flying clubs in the UK (mine included) that operate on active GA airfields.  Our club members have to be associate members of the full-size club, annd be insured for 3rd party risk (through the British Model Flying Association) and it all works very well.  We fly models off a disused tarmac/concrete runway and we have rules and procedures for keeping out of the full size aircraft's way.  We've been flying on that site since 1964, with (AFAIK) no incidents.  The full size guys also know that if there's a car parked on that disused runway, there are likely to be models about.

I suppose that in Canada you have a lot more room so maybe it's easier to find flying sites, but they are in very short supply in the UK.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #302 on: 10 January, 2019, 07:27:26 am »
The rules just got updated here today. 5km airfields, 1.5km heliports.  Some MAAC (Canadian RC organisations) fields have had dispensation, but they just lost all of their exemptions, so I'm not what will happen. 
New rules are that everyone (Traditional RC and 'drone' users) has to take basic online exam and register their aircrafts. ($5 each).
The rules for more advanced commercial operations have also been greatly simplified (require advanced licence).
Space wise, it depends on where you live.  If you're like me, in Vancouver, it's very hard to find a spot where you can legally fly, although it's much better than the 9km zone they used to have. (Which made it impossible to fly legally).


Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #303 on: 31 May, 2019, 03:12:43 pm »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-48470623
I take it that it almost certainly wasn't XR at Gatwick but they'll almost certainly get blamed for it retrospectively.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

ian

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #304 on: 31 May, 2019, 03:33:32 pm »
There were no drones at Gatwick, they just won't admit it now. XR should realise they can save money by not having to buy actual drones, just claim to have seen one.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #305 on: 31 May, 2019, 03:53:22 pm »
There were no drones at Gatwick, they just won't admit it now. XR should realise they can save money by not having to buy actual drones, just claim to have seen one.

s/claim to have seen/leak plans to fly/

I think that's exactly what they're doing.

Not fast & rarely furious

tweeting occasional in(s)anities as andrewxclark

ElyDave

  • Royal and Ancient Polar Bear Society member 263583
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #307 on: 14 June, 2020, 10:46:56 pm »
Beeb article had it at 55k damages, and the rest legal costs.
“Procrastination is the thief of time, collar him.” –Charles Dickens

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #308 on: 15 June, 2020, 08:33:36 am »
Quote
police have said that some reported drone sightings may have been Sussex Police's own craft.
..

[The couple] say despite the apology they still have "no explanation" for why they were held "incommunicado" for 36 hours.



Quote
Mr Miller also confirmed the force commissioned a "thorough independent review" of the drone incident.

A secret review?
Move Faster and Bake Things

ian

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #309 on: 15 June, 2020, 09:36:02 am »
Good god, they all love pouring money into this. Just admit it: there were no drones.

Adam

  • It'll soon be summer
    • Charity ride Durness to Dover 18-25th June 2011
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #310 on: 27 June, 2020, 09:52:45 pm »
I think there was a police one, but they didn't realise it was one of their own.
“Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving.” -Albert Einstein

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #311 on: 28 June, 2020, 08:17:46 am »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator? 

TheLurker

  • Goes well with magnolia.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #312 on: 28 June, 2020, 10:28:46 am »
Quote from: Polar Bear
Looking at this cynically ... on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

My (cynical) viewpoint is that it was more about reserving the airspace for commercial exploitation by Amazon & its fellow travellers.  I suspect the Police & Prison Services were also quite keen for it to get the nod because neds had taken to using drones to get contraband of various sorts into prisons and it gives them another stick to beat perpetrators with.  Of course people smuggling stuff into prisons aren't going to be queueing up to take the BMFA/CAA competency tests, but that aspect has already been done to death earlier in the thread.

Quote from: Polar Bear
How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator?
If Amazon et al do go in for drone delivery in a big way I suspect the answer to that question will be, "just about everybody".

Am _so_ glad that I only build and fly sub 250g Free Flight stuff.
Τα πιο όμορφα ταξίδια γίνονται με τις δικές μας δυνάμεις - Φίλοι του Ποδήλατου

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #313 on: 28 June, 2020, 10:54:36 am »
I was intrigued to see dji produce a drone at 249 grams and even more impressed when I saw one in use.  Reading further I see that they even have a version to comply with Japan's sub 200g laws.

It will not be long before more manufacturers such as Parrot? produce similar versions so I guess that our overlords and dictators will then change the rules again.

I was thinking of buying a dji Mavic Mini just to play with.  I always wanted a radio controlled  helicopter as a kid and having a camera too seems like the opportunity for some great fun and interesting photographic memories when visiting lovely remote places.

Redlight

  • Enjoying life in the slow lane
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #314 on: 28 June, 2020, 11:01:47 am »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator?

I have. A couple of summers ago one flew very low over the back gardens in our street. It wasn't clear where it came from, but we suspect a small block of flats with balconies nearby.
Why should anybody steal a watch when they can steal a bicycle?

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #315 on: 28 June, 2020, 12:35:18 pm »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator? 

This ‘problem that doesn’t exist’ came close to colliding with aircraft on 139 occasions in 2018, and 125 in 2019. That may be a risk you are willing to take. As a pilot, I am not.

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/Reports-and-analysis/Statistics/Airprox-involving-UAS-Drones/

andytheflyer

  • Andytheex-flyer.....
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #316 on: 28 June, 2020, 01:04:49 pm »
The drone issues were part of the reason I packed in radio control model building and flying over the winter, after 25 years of technical challenge, enjoyment and fulfilment. I sold or gave away almost everything.

The model aircraft hobby has been well organised and largely without adverse incident for decades.  We have our own internal voluntary certification and competency programmes, well taken up.  We also had approval from the CAA to build and fly very, very large models (like >100 kg and > 20 ft wingspans), well capable of being a hazard to full size aircraft if flown irresponsibly.  But they aren't.

Some of us even flew off active general aviation facilities and clubs like mine, were seen as part of the full-size private aviation scene.  We abided by the rules and even trained full-size pilots to fly models (harder, they said).

I did not have to undertake any additional competency tests to comply with the drone regulations, I was already deemed competent by the regulatory authorities. and have been for many years.  Even the additional fee was not a real issue.  The real issue for me was that I didn't want to be part of a hobby now being subsumed into regulation forced into being by idiots, and largely unenforceable anyway.  I exercised my democratic right to opt out.

And no, there were no drones at Heathrow or Gatwick, other than the police ones that it is.  Go ahead, Plod and CAA, prove it.  No you can't, because they didn't exist and you don't have the honesty to say so.


Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #317 on: 28 June, 2020, 02:17:20 pm »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator? 

This ‘problem that doesn’t exist’ came close to colliding with aircraft on 139 occasions in 2018, and 125 in 2019. That may be a risk you are willing to take. As a pilot, I am not.

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/Reports-and-analysis/Statistics/Airprox-involving-UAS-Drones/

What I was referring to Tim was the problem of the apparent drone at Gatwick which fired off all the shenanigans.  I accept that drones can be a hazard to aircraft and a greater level of control may not be a bad thing but sometimes the legislators lift their knee into the groin of reasonableness in order to look like they are effective when they are not simply to placate their red-faced, vein-popping angry indignant supporters.

People with malicious intent or who are totally selfish or ignorant tend not to follow laws and rules regardless of their existence.  Using a mobile phone whilst driving springs to mind.

Out of interest, do you know how many drone strikes there have been?  And no, I am not suggesting that because the total might be low that it is not an issue.

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #318 on: 28 June, 2020, 04:19:50 pm »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator?

I have. A couple of summers ago one flew very low over the back gardens in our street. It wasn't clear where it came from, but we suspect a small block of flats with balconies nearby.

Nothing 32 grams of number 6 shot wouldn't sort out.  Most of them round here are toys, though I have seen the farm drone surveying the fields out Miserden way but that thing is huge.
Somewhat of a professional tea drinker.


fuaran

  • rothair gasta
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #319 on: 28 June, 2020, 04:37:53 pm »
This ‘problem that doesn’t exist’ came close to colliding with aircraft on 139 occasions in 2018, and 125 in 2019. That may be a risk you are willing to take. As a pilot, I am not.

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/Reports-and-analysis/Statistics/Airprox-involving-UAS-Drones/
Plenty of reports by pilots. How many of them actually exist? How many of them were drones? How many were actually close the aircraft?
Seems to be a lot of reports of drones several thousand feet up.

TimC

  • Old blerk sometimes onabike.
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #320 on: 28 June, 2020, 04:52:09 pm »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator? 

This ‘problem that doesn’t exist’ came close to colliding with aircraft on 139 occasions in 2018, and 125 in 2019. That may be a risk you are willing to take. As a pilot, I am not.

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/Reports-and-analysis/Statistics/Airprox-involving-UAS-Drones/

What I was referring to Tim was the problem of the apparent drone at Gatwick which fired off all the shenanigans.  I accept that drones can be a hazard to aircraft and a greater level of control may not be a bad thing but sometimes the legislators lift their knee into the groin of reasonableness in order to look like they are effective when they are not simply to placate their red-faced, vein-popping angry indignant supporters.

People with malicious intent or who are totally selfish or ignorant tend not to follow laws and rules regardless of their existence.  Using a mobile phone whilst driving springs to mind.

Out of interest, do you know how many drone strikes there have been?  And no, I am not suggesting that because the total might be low that it is not an issue.

I have no idea what the situation actually was at Gatwick, but I don't doubt that there was at least one large drone spotted over the airfield. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that it was operated by the Police. As for actual drone collisions, this Wiki article relates a few, but I believe there have been more.

Whether legislation will in itself have any effect is moot, but it at least provides specific offences that the Police can use to apprehend potential offenders rather than the more woolly 'hazard to navigation' legislation that previously covered the issue.

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #321 on: 28 June, 2020, 05:25:54 pm »
How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator?

Define issue? I was on the top of A'Dam Lookout, one of the highest public ally accessible places in Amsterdam, a couple of summers back. As I watched the sun set, a small drone came up and flew around the observation deck. A few minutes later we got a close fly by from a much much larger rotary wing craft, with blue flashy lights, and markings suggesting the people inside were polite.

I've also had drones buzz me while riding across the delta works in Zeeland. I'm guessing a cyclist provides them with a nice focal point for their industrial video...

J
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

rogerzilla

  • When n+1 gets out of hand
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #322 on: 28 June, 2020, 05:29:40 pm »
How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator?

Define issue? I was on the top of A'Dam Lookout, one of the highest public ally accessible places in Amsterdam, a couple of summers back. As I watched the sun set, a small drone came up and flew around the observation deck. A few minutes later we got a close fly by from a much much larger rotary wing craft, with blue flashy lights, and markings suggesting the people inside were polite.

I've also had drones buzz me while riding across the delta works in Zeeland. I'm guessing a cyclist provides them with a nice focal point for their industrial video...

J
...which, like all drone videos, will then have indescribably shite background music added before it goes on YouTube.  I am reliably informed that tutorials on Linux shell scripting use equally abhorrent soundtracks.
Hard work sometimes pays off in the end, but laziness ALWAYS pays off NOW.

Kim

  • Timelord
    • Fediverse
Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #323 on: 28 June, 2020, 05:32:41 pm »
A tutorial on shell scripting has no place being a video.

ian

Re: Gatwick drones -what utter stupidity and selfishness
« Reply #324 on: 29 June, 2020, 10:09:52 am »
Looking at this cynically the so-called drone incursion allowed the government a convenient excuse to strengthen drone laws in an attempt to further control the masses on the back of a problem that simply didn't exist.

How many people in honest reality have had an issue with a drone being flown near them that can be attributed to a private operator? 

This ‘problem that doesn’t exist’ came close to colliding with aircraft on 139 occasions in 2018, and 125 in 2019. That may be a risk you are willing to take. As a pilot, I am not.

https://www.airproxboard.org.uk/Reports-and-analysis/Statistics/Airprox-involving-UAS-Drones/

What I was referring to Tim was the problem of the apparent drone at Gatwick which fired off all the shenanigans.  I accept that drones can be a hazard to aircraft and a greater level of control may not be a bad thing but sometimes the legislators lift their knee into the groin of reasonableness in order to look like they are effective when they are not simply to placate their red-faced, vein-popping angry indignant supporters.

People with malicious intent or who are totally selfish or ignorant tend not to follow laws and rules regardless of their existence.  Using a mobile phone whilst driving springs to mind.

Out of interest, do you know how many drone strikes there have been?  And no, I am not suggesting that because the total might be low that it is not an issue.

I have no idea what the situation actually was at Gatwick, but I don't doubt that there was at least one large drone spotted over the airfield. I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that it was operated by the Police. As for actual drone collisions, this Wiki article relates a few, but I believe there have been more.

Whether legislation will in itself have any effect is moot, but it at least provides specific offences that the Police can use to apprehend potential offenders rather than the more woolly 'hazard to navigation' legislation that previously covered the issue.

I think there can certainly be problems with drones and the people who fly them, I certainly don't want one to fall on my head, for instance.

There's no evidence that was a particular drone at Gatwick though (I'm sure at some point someone has flown a drone near Gatwick, of course) – despite massive resources thrown at finding it, no one managed even a grainy photograph. It was a textbook example of a 'moral panic' and of course, a sunk cost, they've put so much effort and money into finding something (not to mention arresting and imprisoning people) that wasn't there, they can't acknowledge that it wasn't there.

I doubt it was any kind of anti-drone conspiracy.