Derbyshire / Nottinghamshire U.K
- Thread starter Tydrones
- Start date
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
Yes, Nottinghamshire is lovely but plenty of illegal flying in that video.
If you need to ask why, brush up on your CAP722/393 knowledge or at least adhere to the 'Drone Code' as laid down by the UK CAA.
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
I would agree with the sentiment - but, it doesn’t look like a crowded or built up area to me. They’re more than 50m away. Looks fine.
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
As I read the drone code, that specific instruction only applies to crowds and built up areas. It’s separate from the ‘people and properites’ sentence.
Attachments
The Drone Code is a guide, the Air Navigation Order is law.
No direct flying overhead allowed - ever. The only exception would be OSC granted by CAA and arresting device fitted to the UAV along with proven redundancy in the airframe systems.
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
Then the guide isn’t fit for purpose. If the regulator expects people to adhere to the law then they need to produce a document that is more comprehensive. I say this as someone that has worked for a government department for over ten years, and has produced guidance notes for the waste industry. The CAA has absolutely zero chance of a successful prosecution (if we used this video as an example) as the pilot can simply quote the guidance provided by the regulator.
Does that apply to all aircraft? I live close to Heathrow and have planes flying over my house all day.
Do the words "and do not overfly" not appear in bold in there?
You can argue semantics but as we all know - ignorance is no defence when it comes to the law.
It is up to the individual making the flight to ensure they abide by all national and any local laws. They can be found within the Air Navigation Order.
I am not arguing with you, just saying how it will be interpreted.
I fly commercially so probably have a more rigid outlook than many on this board, but that doesn't mean everybody should not be adhering to the law with regards to aviation safety.
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
See Post #7
It’s not ignorance when one can quote verbatim the guidance note provided by the regulator.
I speak from experience when I say this. If a guidance note is provided by the regulator, and a person quotes it when accused of breaking regulations said regulator enforces, then any law that may or may not have been broken would be irrelevant as the proposed prosecution wouldn’t even get as far as the CPS.
For clarity - I personally abide by the regs covering the flying of drones, and would hope all members of this board do. It’s a hobby I enjoy and mindless idiots putting it at risk frustrates me. However, in this case I don’t think the poster of the video above has violated the laws if we use the code as published by the regulator. If they were to be prosecuted I would happily offer myself, my experience as a warrant card holding member of staff for a government regulator, and my time in their defence - as the guidance note provided does not offer clarity sufficient for its intended audience.
So the Air Navigation Order doesn't apply to regular aircraft? Funny, there seems to be a lot about them in the order. I think you should be as clear as possible when citing which rules/laws apply to drones. There's enough confusion already, we shouldn't be trying to muddy the waters further.
Of course it does - it was originally written for manned aircraft!
You need to read the pertinent articles which relate to UAV's which is 94/95 together with CAP 722
Lastrexking
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify my point that the 'overfly' rule doesn’t apply to 'people and property' - the diagram in the drone code clearly shows a drone overflying a house keeping a distance of 50m, whereas for built up areas the diagram shows you can’t overfly.
Attachments
thank you for the positive feedback and the music is "The Wedding" by James Horner in the movie Deep Impact
