Ask first vs Apologise later.

[AeroJ]

Thought it would be fun to keep an informal record of occasions when I have a) asked first or b) apologised later, in order to see over a large range of time which approach most wins and results in me getting the footage !

To that end, I have just been down to the local golf course, whose greens are looking particularly verdant at this time of year and after the recent rain, and asked them if I could come back during golden hour when they only have a few people left playing, and drone their greens, and they have said yes including me TOAL from the site ! So that's win Number 1 for 'Ask first'.

Table updated thusly...

Asked First	Apologized later	Got the footage ?	Notes.
1		Yes	Golf Club. Nice guy, that Adrian...

Feel free to tell me about your examples, and I shall add them to the running tally !

 

[Cafguy]

Ask first is one of the best rules!! You can turn a future "Karen" into a friend by simply being Friendly. Thanks to this rule I get to fly my Tiny Drones in the gymnasium of the local catholic school. I was sooo nervous walking in to the fathers office! lol. He's the best.

 

[Phantomrain.org]

This is what is called opening a Can of Worms, its a big no for me.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain, Land on the Water, an dont you open no can of worms.

 

[AeroJ]

This is what is called opening a Can of Worms, its a big no for me.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain, Land on the Water, an dont you open no can of worms.

I know what you mean. Partly I am doing this to see how often asking first results in a 'no'. I am vaguely hopeful it will be less than we might think !

 

[DARKSeifer]

There's no point in asking for permission, all my best drone pics are impossible to do within the regulation.

By asking for permission, you put yourself on disadvantage and under the authority of a third person that won't have a clue of the regulation anyway, so it doesn't really matter if he says yes or no.

Hit and run and if anyone asks, you are really sorry, you didn't know it was forbidden, and bye bye to fly another day.

 

[AeroJ]

By asking for permission, you put yourself on disadvantage and under the authority of a third person that won't have a clue of the regulation anyway, so it doesn't really matter if he says yes or no.

This isn't primarily about regulation - in today's golf course, for example, I could easily have flown it from the field next door, but asking gets me TOAL on the site from nicely mowed greens, clear sight-lines uninterrupted by trees and hedges and whatnot, no angry golfers, and the ability to pre-site survey where I discovered power lines that I may well not have seen had I only viewed it remotely. Really the ONLY disadvantage is if they say no, and you respect their decision or reasons, or then don't feel comfortable enough to fly, so don't get the footage. Yes that IS putting your session within their power, but my theory is that quite a lot of people will be pleased that you were prepared to do that out of consideration for them, and may want to reciprocate in kind by letting you fly if they can. Then everyone's a winner, we get the footage, and everyone has nice 'drone-positive' interaction with no nasty surprises during the subsequent session !

I will say now, in bold contrast to the above, that when it comes to NT / EH, I will be universally doing the 'apologise later' method, and ideally the 'not asking, not apologising, and doing it anyway', within legal rules and the bounds of safety of course !

 

[PhotoDB]

A local parochial school asked me to do a drone photo of her grade school soccer team, pro bono, in their practice field in the Cleveland Metroparks. I told her I would need permission from the Park Authority which has a strict "no drone" policy.

I explained to the park office that I didn't need to "fly" around the park, but merely set my drone straight up, 20-30 feet in the air, take the shot, and come back down. I explained that I was licensed, insured, and happy to have their park ranger observe to make sure things were okay. She said to put it in writing, which I did.

A week later, I got the response. Yes, I could "probably" do it, but I had to prepay the park ranger two-hour minimum fee of $150 for the "privilege." We declined.

 

[AeroJ]

A week later, I got the response. Yes, I could "probably" do it, but I had to prepay the park ranger two-hour minimum fee of $150 for the "privilege." We declined.

Hope you did it anyway when they weren't looking !

That is yet another reason that I so emphatically object to the NT / EH people, who bang on about nature disturbance and privacy, and quiet places for the public, yet if you pay them the whopping £300 they want for a film permit all those objections mysteriously go away ! Disgraceful behaviour.

These people need to stop looking at recreational pilots as cash cows flying expensive toys - the very fact that we are flying expensive toys means we don't need to be spending any more cash capturing views everyone else is allowed for free !

 

[lilewis]

One Saturday last year I took my MP2 to the athletic field of a local middle school when no one was there, except a policeman in his cruiser monitoring traffic. I thought about my options and figured he would probably say no, and then I would hesitate to return back there in the future. But I wanted to be honest so I pulled up next to him and asked if he minded if I practiced flying there. His response was "sure, enjoy the flight" and I did - and many other flights after that. The most surprising thing was the police station was only a hundred yards away and he didn't mind. I also fly it sometimes in local parks and on weekends at large empty parking lots when very few people are present. Have never been confronted, but if confronted, I'd say "ok" and then just leave.

 

[PhotoDB]

Hope you did it anyway when they weren't looking !

That is yet another reason that I so emphatically object to the NT / EH people, who bang on about nature disturbance and privacy, and quiet places for the public, yet if you pay them the whopping £300 they want for a film permit all those objections mysteriously go away ! Disgraceful behaviour.

These people need to stop looking at recreational pilots as cash cows flying expensive toys - the very fact that we are flying expensive toys means we don't need to be spending any more cash capturing views everyone else is allowed for free !

Help me out. What does NT /EH stand for? Thx.

 

[AeroJ]

Help me out. What does NT /EH stand for? Thx.

Sorry dude - National Trust / English Heritage !

 

[AeroJ]

One Saturday last year I took my MP2 to the athletic field of a local middle school when no one was there, except a policeman in his cruiser monitoring traffic. I thought about my options and figured he would probably say no, and then I would hesitate to return back there in the future. But I wanted to be honest so I pulled up next to him and asked if he minded if I practiced flying there. His response was "sure, enjoy the flight" and I did - and many other flights after that. The most surprising thing was the police station was only a hundred yards away and he didn't mind. I also fly it sometimes in local parks and on weekends at large empty parking lots when very few people are present. Have never been confronted, but if confronted, I'd say "ok" and then just leave.

Oh that's what I call a mega-win - I LOVE those situations where you find the courage to ask once, and by doing so gain permission to do it again and again after that Bravo ! I will add you to my lists and tables if that's OK ?

 

[PhotoDB]

Sorry dude - National Trust / English Heritage !

Aha...a UK thing. Gotta protect those monuments...those castles could come tumbling down if you fly too close.

 

[AeroJ]

Aha...a UK thing. Gotta protect those monuments...those castles could come tumbling down if you fly too close.

Ah yes, although in the US (is that where you are from btw ?) of course, it's the National Parks who fulfil the same function, and fail equally miserably to allow fair aerial access !

 

[Droning on and on...]

So you have a National Park like Yosemite.

You, a drone hobbyist, are dying to capture some incredible footage.

Other visitors don't want the sight and sound of a drone wrecking their use of the park. Maybe appearing suddenly in a picture they're taking.

Who should prevail?

That's the conundrum. All have equal say. The drone pilot generally doesn't see the disturbance the same way as the other attendees, and vice versa.

Right now, there are so many more of "them" than "us", their voices win. That's democracy, and I lean toward that being "right", even if it frustrates my goals. In order for democracy to work for me, I have to accept (and daresay support) it when it works against me (but in favor of other, equal citizens).

So it's incumbent on us, the tiny minority with those annoying, buzzing, spying toys, to persuade the public otherwise.

Defying rules and interacting with those "others" with an "I have rights" attitude will only make it worse. Pick a fight and you usually get one. Respecting the wishes of private property owners will make it better. Same with respecting rules in public places.

Ask if you can. Respect "no" if that's the answer, and go fly somewhere else. Very rarely is anything so vital to capture that you can't walk away, put it in the past, and go have fun and get some amazing media in a different locale near by.

 

[AeroJ]

Other visitors don't want the sight and sound of a drone wrecking their use of the park.

I could buy that if people were constantly trying to fly those massively loud ducted FPV things, but on the whole they are not - they have nice small, unobtrusive craft like Minis, Airs or Mavics, which are are tiny dots in the sky to ground=based observers most of the time, and quieter than passing planes at 33,000 ft !

Maybe appearing suddenly in a picture they're taking.

Oh we're surely clutching at straws there ?! People should know where the clone brush is to remove the 4 pixels ruining their image - lols.

Who should prevail?

Everyone should ! A framework should be developed that allows both, and mitigates them annoying each other ! Simple 'Considerate droning is fine, but keep away from groups of people, not at peak times, and stay high...' signs would be unbelievably easy to implement and put on a website ! Rangers could go back to doing whatever valuable work they presumably do instead of wasting everyone's time reprimanding and fining people who are only trying to do the most obvious thing to do in the parks - take photos and video, with whatever equipment they have at their disposal !

So it's incumbent on us, the tiny minority with those annoying, buzzing, spying toys, to persuade the public otherwise.

Yes, and I would argue that one way to do that is to consistently be able to show the world the most amazing places from a vantage point they probably haven't got ! They should be bloody delighted with us !! You're right - we DO see it a very different way hey ?

Defying rules and interacting with those "others" with an "I have rights" attitude will only make it worse. Pick a fight and you usually get one. Respecting the wishes of private property owners will make it better. Same with respecting rules in public places.

I'm not really up for defying rules and picking fights. If that was the case I wouldn't care where I TOAL from when I was doing the UK areas of outstanding natural beauty, and would do it from their land, which I am careful not to do. So I am actually obeying their wretched rules, even though I am more than happy to exploit gaps in their land borders and public bridleways running through them where it is possible, which, a lot of the time, it isn't ! Also I am not provoking them at all - I am not an 'Audit' guy who notifies them about what I am going to do before I do it, and I even upload footage without mentioning the name of the place, so it is unlikely to be found by the organisations in question, and thereby what they don't know hasn't hurt anybody, and yet we've all got the footage to enjoy, findable through more generic search terms !

Ask if you can. Respect "no" if that's the answer, and go fly somewhere else. Very rarely is anything so vital to capture that you can't walk away, put it in the past, and go have fun and get some amazing media in a different locale near by.

Contrary to how it may appear, that is actually my default behaviour and I agree with it completely. It's just that NT/EH control SO MUCH of our most epic views they require special treatment and effort to circumvent their discriminatory and unfair policies !

 

[Cymruflyer]

When I was young, It took me a long time to figure out how rules (Prayers) worked. For years I would be good all year and do good things and pray all year for a new bike. Come Christmas, I'd wake up and no new bike. I again was good, did good things the following year and prayed extra hard for a new bike. Christmas morning, I woke up... no bike.

Then I thought long and hard about how to go about such a thing. So that summer, I went out and stole a bike and prayed for forgiveness. Problem solved!

 

[AeroJ]

Yes it's a lovely story, thank you. Except you can't steal a view of countryside can you ?! This is not stealing. They have no right to withold what is there and freely available to everyone else with a camera phone.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I could buy that if people were constantly trying to fly those massively loud ducted FPV things, but on the whole they are not - they have nice small, unobtrusive craft like Minis, Airs or Mavics, which are are tiny dots in the sky to ground=based observers most of the time, and quieter than passing planes at 33,000 ft !

There's no rule that says you have to accept that other people see things differently than you. However, insisting that something that bothers people shouldn't won't get you very far with them.

It doesn't matter if you or I think the mini2 is a quiet, unobtrusive nothingburger. They see an anonymous, noisy flying camera that they don't want taking their picture.

You may think they're ridiculously hysterical. They don't. They have a vote too.

 

[Droning on and on...]

Yes it's a lovely story, thank you. Except you can't steal a view of countryside can you ?! This is not stealing. They have no right to withold what is there and freely available to everyone else with a camera phone.

Well see? Right there is what I'm talking about.

Yes they do have that right, or we wouldn't be debating it. You (perhaps) just disagree with the law.

A drone is not a camera phone, in many critical aspects, as they see it. I can completely understand and respect their POV, while disagreeing with it.