36-year-old man from Barcelona REPORTED for flying a drone through the Catalan capital

[Deleted member 103366]

That's not clear, but I assume that so.

I do not read Spanish but the Google translation "The Mossos d'Esquadra have reported a 36-year-old man from Barcelona for flying a drone through the Catalan capital several times without a permit or insurance. With all the information gathered, the State Aviation Safety Agency has been informed, which can impose a penalty on the pilot of up to 220,000 euros." seems fairly unequivocal, he has been "reported" not convicted.

As for the rest of your post I can't be bothered answering it.

 

[Yaros]

DJI already have an absolute ceiling at 500m above the take off point and they already have automated distance warnings. Those would not be too difficult for DJI to change and I doubt it would be too difficult to program in total no fly zones over towns and cities.

Sure, DJI can make total no fly zones, but how does that stop me from hacking their firmware flying freely, yet illegally? The truth is that, nothing... Things like DroneHacks will exist, and even if they don't I will still find a way to get my drone to fly in those "total no fly zones".

This doesn't mean I will, but if Spain goes that far as to put no fly zones everywhere, that will lead me into thinking to do so.

 

[Deleted member 103366]

Ahh.
With an attitude like that maybe you will be the subject of a similar thread at some future date, best of luck.

 

[Yaros]

Ahh.
With an attitude like that maybe you will be the subject of a similar thread at some future date, best of luck.

Don't get me wrong. I do respect the laws and regulations only when they are reasonable.
When Spain tries to put bs rules they don't need to expect that people will follow them, an example of this is the C-Marking /classification.

 

[MS Coast]

"I do respect the laws and regulations only when they are reasonable."

You disagree with yourself.

 

[Skwirl]

"I do respect the laws and regulations only when they are reasonable."

You disagree with yourself.

What that means is if the laws doesnt restrict what he wants to do.

 

[Don Testme]

What would you think is a "Fair Fine" for his actions? At what point is the fine "low enough" to not deter the actions? At what point if the fine TOO high to be fair? Actually, to be fair if he didn't break the rules there would b ZERO fine!!!

Play Stupid Games get Stupid Rewards!!

Which part of "Up to" is confusing so many? Many fines have a MAX and unless the actions are serious negligent, repeat offenses, or some type of Incident actually happened MAX FINES are rarely levied. The Up To is a very important part of this equation. I find it deeply ironic that he hasn't even been fined yet and some are already jumping to his defense.. I say FINE him the MAX fine and let it be an example to the followers . . .

Ponder this... if those EXACT same actions had caused a manned aircraft to crash would that "Max Fine" be ok with you? Actions are the same but the consequences would be a bit different. Maybe the 220K Euros is an enticement to NOT jeopardize life and limb of other human beings . . . .

Fines in general, including traffic fines, in my opinion, should be based of the individual income of the citizen being fined. But this is what court is for. If the citizen explains their financial situation, judges will often reduce fines. You just have to ask.

 

[BigAl07]

Fines in general, including traffic fines, in my opinion, should be based of the individual income of the citizen being fined. But this is what court is for. If the citizen explains their financial situation, judges will often reduce fines. You just have to ask.

That's not fair at all. If you can't afford the fine then follow the law. The same law, the same infraction, and the same "Adverse Reaction" is how it should be IMHO. We'll have to agree to disagree here.

A Sliding Scale for fines is just asking to make things complicated across the board. If the judge feels so inclined that is their authority but I whole heartedly do not support a Slide Scale for fines in general.

 

[MS Coast]

What that means is if the laws doesnt restrict what he wants to do.

Exactly. He doesn't respect the law itself or the people and process that created it.

 

[zocalo]

To a point where most people will not be following them, me included.
When too many restrictions are put in place, people will not follow them...

That's pretty much what I fear happening, yes, and I'd prefer to avoid that if at all possible.

The legislative next step after that would almost certainly be that drone sales would be heavily restricted; you'd need a license just to buy one, you'd need some kind of approval to fly, tracking devices become mandatory, etc., etc. Governments have tried restrictions on how and where you can fly, have tried registration schemes, competency training, and so on. Globally it's now a mish mash of rules and restrictions that have removed a lot of the simple joy of travelling and photographing foreign lands with a drone, and I do NOT want that to get any worse. We have rules and flight restrictions, we have competency tests and registration programmes; it's time to enforce them and demonstrate that they're being taken seriously. That means a few examples are going to need to be made, and if you're one of those people who repeatedly breaks multiple rules at the same time, then I can't think of anyone more deserving to get that dubious honour.

I think a lot of this is also timing; social media seems to bring out the worst in a significant number of people, and without the publicity it so easily affords a lot of people wouldn't be doing stunts like this for the clicks and revenue that results. If drones had gone mainstream before social media we probably wouldn't be having growing pains quite so badly as we are, but it didn't and so here we are. That does, however, mean that the social media companies can be part of the solution; if I post something illegal to a social media platform (promoting hard drugs or hate crimes, say) I can expect it to be taken down pretty quickly, yet very few takedowns seem to be issued by the authorities for clearly illegal drone footage. Again, a few key examples being made of some of the biggest influencers doing this may be all it takes to get a lot of the rest to be a little more circumspect in what they choose to share, and if they're not sharing it then they may not want to obtain it in the first place.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I do respect the laws and regulations only when they are reasonable.

As has been stated in many of these types of threads - there was a time when there were virtually no rules governing 'drone' flight, and it wasn't that long ago. But because drones took little, to no skill to fly them, the numbers of new, inexperienced pilots rose quickly.

When I hear a new pilot say 'they always fly safe' and would never do anything that puts others property or person at risk - I believe they believe that; but it does not mean they can safely conduct flight in all phases they may encounter. It just means they have not experienced all that can go wrong and therefore cannot believe it until it happens and even then, they may think the fault does not belong to themselves. For examples of this, just read the daily topics on 'Crash and Flyaway Assistance'.

Likewise when I hear the word 'reasonable' in the context we're discussing, it really means nothing. Reasonable to who? How many versions of 'reasonable' would we get if we ask 100 pilots? No laws are written anywhere, that are reasonable to everyone.

I am not saying you are a new pilot or unreasonable - I am just saying that to suggest that laws written to satisfy what everyone's version of reasonable is - is by definition - impossible and pointless.

I've witnessed RC aviation for a very long time and saw the birth of the modern 'drone' and have seen what happens when otherwise responsible adults are left to their own 'safety' standards. I've seen the regulatory efforts here in the US by the FAA in response to drones and I gotta say; they seem pretty reasonable to me.

 

[AZDave]

That's exactly the problem! Spain is just way too restrictive when it comes to airspace and drones! Just sayin', AESA isn't following EASA rules because AESA modified the C1 category weight limit, which is not allowed by EASA... just plain stupidity on the side of Spain.
When I went to Barcelona I saw some drones there, but I haven't flown there myself.

Any ignorance I find in this thread isn't coming from the same place that you think it is.

 

[zocalo]

Likewise when I hear the word 'reasonable' in the context we're discussing, it really means nothing. Reasonable to who? How many versions of 'reasonable' would we get if we ask 100 pilots? No laws are written anywhere, that are reasonable to everyone.

Reminds me of an old gag: "if you ask ten lawyers for their opinion, you'll get at least eleven opinions". You would hope that pilots have a more uniform view on things, but if threads like this are anything to go by it's pretty clear they do not.

"Reasonable" in a legal context is one of those wishy-washy words that gets put in when someone who should have known better couldn't be bothered to determine where a suitable boundary lies (perhaps with good reason). It's basically kicking the can down the road to those who decide they are going to test the limits of the boundary and, ultimately, to the courts when things go wrong. More cynically, it's a politician hedging by placing a vague boundary line of what is acceptable because public opinion on the matter isn't resolute enough to let them risk alienating some of their voters who are more conservative/liberal by being more precise.

That last line, especially for a drone pilot in the current environment, should be a huge red flag. It means when things go wrong you are going to be tried in the court of public opinion and/or be at the mercy of a random court whose presiding judge may be having a bad day. You're certainly not going to get much sympathy from those who don't flout the rules and we are all are going to see even more restrictions and hostile behaviour from members of the public as a result. We're all in the same pool here; we need to keep the water clean and kick out those who deliberately do not, allowing that accidents and honest mistakes do happen.

 

[BigAl07]

Reminds me of an old gag: "if you ask ten lawyers for their opinion, you'll get at least eleven opinions". You would hope that pilots have a more uniform view on things, but if threads like this are anything to go by it's pretty clear they do not.

"Reasonable" in a legal context is one of those wishy-washy words that gets put in when someone who should have known better couldn't be bothered to determine where a suitable boundary lies (perhaps with good reason). It's basically kicking the can down the road to those who decide they are going to test the limits of the boundary and, ultimately, to the courts when things go wrong. More cynically, it's a politician hedging by placing a vague boundary line of what is acceptable because public opinion on the matter isn't resolute enough to let them risk alienating some of their voters who are more conservative/liberal by being more precise.

That last line, especially for a drone pilot in the current environment, should be a huge red flag. It means when things go wrong you are going to be tried in the court of public opinion and/or be at the mercy of a random court whose presiding judge may be having a bad day. You're certainly not going to get much sympathy from those who don't flout the rules and we are all are going to see even more restrictions and hostile behaviour from members of the public as a result. We're all in the same pool here; we need to keep the water clean and kick out those who deliberately do not, allowing that accidents and honest mistakes do happen.

Very well said.

 

[Drone Views Media]

No, but I just find it very stupid, this shouldn't be happening!

What shouldn't have happened is that individual flying illegally. He broke the regulations!

 

[nafisgal]

Spain is one of the most restrictive EASA countries in UAS flights... especially in the CTR zone of the airport (Barcelona is a CTR zone).... This "phenomenon" to put it mildly... has done it several times. sometimes above 400 ft/ 120m compromising the safety of the rest of the aircraft... Because of these.... "enlightened" ones they persecute the legal ones... putting us all in the same bag... A mortgage at least You will need to pay the fine.... These types of infractions are subject to aeronautical legislation and are very large.
In the forum there is information about it if you fly abroad: UAV Rules and Regulations
Reviewing it and reviewing the legislation of the country where you intend to fly, will free you from enormous scares... especially economic ones...
In Spain you should check the website of the national aeronautical manager to find out where you can fly your drone/UAS: ENAIRE Drones
Fly with your head. Fly safe. Fly easy.