Illegal to fly within 250 yards of road...

[AlbionDrones]

I know that within the UK we have issues with permission to fly in some areas. Due to this we always check NOTAMS for NFZ and no fly requests before visiting an area, and then check on Altitude Angel and DJI Apps before flying - also that there are some landowners stating (incorrectly) that it is illegal to fly over their property (NT / EH / etc), however today while flying my - sub 250gm DJI MINI 3 Pro - over a NT abbey - from public land and staying within the Drone Code guidelines - VLOS, LOAL away from private land, 90ft clearance from any non-involved persons (we were the only people on site) - we were accosted by the just arrived NT warden and told to land immediately and that we were breaking the law as we were flying within 250 yards of a road! Not wanting conflict we did land and left the site, after informing the warden that our drone was sub 250gm, can overfly people and places as long as 90 ft separation vertically was maintained.

I get that they dont want UAV being used over their land, and can use their byelaws to prevent TOAL on their land, but as we all know, they have admitted they cannot stop overflights, however, in this instancce it was the sheer incorrectness of the information he was quoting that took me aback! 250yards - about 750ft - from the nearest paved road was what he 'knew' to be the law...

Seems that the NT have some work to do on educating their staff. I thought the NT was their to hold their assets 'in trust for the nation and for the use and enjoyment of the people of the land', seems to me they are more interested in £££ rather than in allowing decent folks to enjoy the places they are looking after.

TBH I cannot understand the NT, they are missing a trick, they could easily charge a drone fee on top of the site entrance, have it limited to an hour at start of day and end of day, with only 15 minute slots bookable, and specify that you have to be an NT member to fly, but instead they are alienating a potential revenue stream - who are also providing free advertising for their sites - as well as discouraging us from spending money in the local area - something that in these austere times I would think they would want to do.

I know there is a feeling that the Gerneral Public are upset and annoyed by drones flying about, but all I can say is that whenever we have been out flying - legally and according to the Drone Code - we have had nothing but positive interest from those who have come across us. I think the perception is actually far from the truth, most people like to see new things being used - as long as being used safely...

Sorry, just feel a bit down after today, was looking forwards to a few visits, got a couple of good bits of footage, and then accosted by someone who didnt know what he was talking about in such a manner made me feel really anxious and disheartened...

 

[lensimages]

I know that within the UK we have issues with permission to fly in some areas. Due to this we always check NOTAMS for NFZ and no fly requests before visiting an area, and then check on Altitude Angel and DJI Apps before flying - also that there are some landowners stating (incorrectly) that it is illegal to fly over their property (NT / EH / etc), however today while flying my - sub 250gm DJI MINI 3 Pro - over a NT abbey - from public land and staying within the Drone Code guidelines - VLOS, LOAL away from private land, 90ft clearance from any non-involved persons (we were the only people on site) - we were accosted by the just arrived NT warden and told to land immediately and that we were breaking the law as we were flying within 250 yards of a road! Not wanting conflict we did land and left the site, after informing the warden that our drone was sub 250gm, can overfly people and places as long as 90 ft separation vertically was maintained.

I get that they dont want UAV being used over their land, and can use their byelaws to prevent TOAL on thir land, but as we all know, they have admitted they cannot stop overflights, however, in this instancce it was the sheer incorrectness of the information he was quoting that took me aback! 250yards - about 750ft - from the nearest paved road was what he 'knew' to be the law...

Seems that the NT have some work to do on educating their staff. I thought the NT was their to hold their assets 'in trust for the nation and for the use and enjoyment of the people of the land', seems to me they are more interested in £££ rather than in allowing decent folks to enjoy the places they are looking after.

TBH I cannot understand the NT, they are missing a trick, they could easily charge a drone fee on top of the site entrance, have it limited to an hour at start of day and end of day, with only 15 minute slots bookable, and specify that you have to be an NT member to fly, but instead they are alienating a potential revenue stream - who are also providing free advertising for their sites - as well as discouraging us from spending in the local area - something that in thier austere times I would think they would want to do.

I know there is a feeling that the Gerneral Public are upset and annoyed by drones flying about, but all I can say is that whenever we have been out flying - legally and according to the Drone Code - we have had nothing but positive interest from those who have come across us. I think the perception is actually far from the truth, most people like to see new things being used - as long as being used safely...

Sorry, just feel a bit down after today, was looking forwards to a few visits, got a couple of good bits of footage, and then accosted by someone who didnt know what he was talking about in such a manner made me feel really anxious and disheartened...

Suggest you take a copy of the drone code with you, I do and hand it to the person that is quoting the law to me. I always like to try to educate these persons that think they know the rules, some they do but more often than not they don’t. I print out two of the CAA drone code pages onto an A4 size paper , cut them in half and keep a few in my drone case, normally works wonders as it gives me extra time to take the images I want whilst they are reading, then land and politely ask if I can answer any more questions about the legality of flying my drone. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn’t but it keeps everything polite and friendly, no agro but if they still insist tell them to please call the police and report me as flying a drone illegally, cheers Len

 

[old man mavic]

@AlbionDrones ,i can sympathise with your post ,i have flown for several years at many spots in the Brecon Beacons both with my MPP and MIni drones ,all following the drone code guidelines,as laid down at the time,there does seem to be a big discrepancy between what was allowed ,and what is allowed under the new rules ,with regards to the sub 250g drones,because many of the people who are the ones that we as drone flyers encounter are misinformed by their employers ,about the changes ,because the people who oversee those employees such as the NT ect ,have no real interest in finding out exactly how the rules apply to different drone categories,and just take a blanket view of any drone ,this attitude came to a confrontation ,between a warden ,myself and a good friend and fellow flying buddy in the autumn of 2021 when we were flying our MMs quite legally from a parking place on the Merthyr Tydfil to Brecon Road well away from any one ,getting some nice shots of the approaching sunset.
he ordered us to land ,and told us we were breaking the law ,and said we were not allowed to fly over the landscape, as we would be affecting the wild life ,and causing distress to domestic animals that were grazing there, as well as damaging their habitat ,my friend got quite upset with his attitude towards us ,i do not need to go into the details of the conversation ,just to say that we were threatened with a possible Civil action against us if we did not comply with the wardens instructions ,this upset my friend so much that he has now sold his drones ,and completely disassociated himself from the hobby not only had my friend done his best to comply with his OP id on his drone, and taken the flyer id test ,but also passed his A2 C of C ,so as to be ready for the upcoming ,at the time changes that were supposed to take place in the summer of 2022,which we now know has been put on hold
sorry for my long post but there is so much misinformation out there about drones ,and its only those people who have a genuine interest in our hobby that bother to become informed

 

[AlbionDrones]

@AlbionDrones ,i can sympathise with your post ,i have flown for several years at many spots in the Brecon Beacons both with my MPP and MIni drones ,all following the drone code guidelines,as laid down at the time,there does seem to be a big discrepancy between what was allowed ,and what is allowed under the new rules ,with regards to the sub 250g drones,because many of the people who are the ones that we as drone flyers encounter are misinformed by their employers ,about the changes ,because the people who oversee those employees such as the NT ect ,have no real interest in finding out exactly how the rules apply to different drone categories,and just take a blanket view of any drone ,this attitude came to a confrontation ,between a warden ,myself and a good friend and fellow flying buddy in the autumn of 2021 when we were flying our MMs quite legally from a parking place on the Merthyr Tydfil to Brecon Road well away from any one ,getting some nice shots of the approaching sunset.
he ordered us to land ,and told us we were breaking the law ,and said we were not allowed to fly over the landscape, as we would be affecting the wild life ,and causing distress to domestic animals that were grazing there, as well as damaging their habitat ,my friend got quite upset with his attitude towards us ,i do not need to go into the details of the conversation ,just to say that we were threatened with a possible Civil action against us if we did not comply with the wardens instructions ,this upset my friend so much that he has now sold his drones ,and completely disassociated himself from the hobby not only had my friend done his best to comply with his OP id on his drone, and taken the flyer id test ,but also passed his A2 C of C ,so as to be ready for the upcoming ,at the time changes that were supposed to take place in the summer of 2022,which we now know has been put on hold
sorry for my long post but there is so much misinformation out there about drones ,and its only those people who have a genuine interest in our hobby that bother to become informed

Thanks for the response OMM, having had it in the neck today - for something I was within my rights to do, and felt bad about it all afternoon - we cut our trip short and drove home 3 hrs instead of going much further - I can understand your friends reaction, we have Op ID and Flyer ID - even though it isnt needed for the Mini 3 Pro - and I am considering the A2 C of C along with a possible bigger drone in the future - for more remote and rough weather flying in the Highlands of Scotland.
I dont plan on giving up anytime soon, but I think I shall try and do some more nature based stuff for a while before I venture back to any NT areas, even if I am TOAL away from their property, just dont need the extra stress and anxiety atm, I have a big interview n Friday for a major promotion at work and today was supposed to be a day of destressing and relaxing, not ending up anxious...
Thanks
Suzanne

 

[Lastrexking]

You should raise a complaint with them. They need to educate their staff on what the actual rules are.

 

[old man mavic]

@AlbionDrones ,thanks for your response to my post #3 above, and may i wish you all the best at your interview on Friday , I am sure you will rise above those negative and totally unnecessary remarks, you received from an ill informed warden ,and carry on flying your drone for the pleasure it gives you ,i know for certain that I intend to do just that ,and have since it happened

 

[Flying Shroppie]

Having been a NT member/volunteer for over 50 years and a drone pilot for 5 years I have seen the situation from both sides and it does the NT no favours. NT staff at "ground level" are deliberately not given the exact legal position and are encouraged to challenge anyone over flying any of the properties.
I have been challenged at a local property and threatend with police action.When I asked the NT employee to go ahead and call the police he instead called his area manager who must have told him to "back off" and the police were not called. I did suggest that I should call the police as I found the employee's atitude threatening and intimidating.
I have offered in my capacity as a NT volunteer to run an information seminar on drones operation. The offer was turned down "as not required".
The rider to all this is in my working life, I was part of a contractor team working on both NT and EH properties and know any damage caused would work out to be incredibly expensive because of the materials and work methods both specify.

 

[RobW01]

Suggest you take a copy of the drone code with you, I do and hand it to the person that is quoting the law to me. I always like to try to educate these persons that think they know the rules, some they do but more often than not they don’t. I print out two of the CAA drone code pages onto an A4 size paper , cut them in half and keep a few in my drone case, normally works wonders as it gives me extra time to take the images I want whilst they are reading, then land and politely ask if I can answer any more questions about the legality of flying my drone. Sometimes it works sometimes it doesn’t but it keeps everything polite and friendly, no agro but if they still insist tell them to please call the police and report me as flying a drone illegally, cheers Len

Sounds sensible.

 

[Gagey52]

Bloody frustrating to have know nothings start dictating rules. I like the comment about calling the police because you felt intimidated. It hasn’t happened to me but I know I will stand my ground if it does.
Regards

 

[Grazuncle]

This is a common post in a UK based drone forum. No I don't think they do want to educate their National Trust personnel as if the brusque pseudo threats work they are happy to get rid of the drone operator; job done.
They can't get the personnel trained with the correct information as their own website promotes the false ideas that flying over their properties is illegal.

I have been a member for decades and have noticed the NT tend to do what they want regardless of feedback; Take the current process of getting rid of male and female toilet facilities and replacing them with non gender ones. My wife needed these facilities at NT property and found that the previously designated female toilets were re-designated non gender. For those women (quite a few) who didn't want to que with other men, for that one, had a half mile walk back, to reception area. I complained at this in an email and asked if the website would publish which properties were doing this so as to be forewarned; they ignored the comment and told us to phone each property in advance of a visit and ask them what the situation there was! I don't care if non gender facilities are provided if they let women have what they want, too.

 

[lensimages]

This is a common post in a UK based drone forum. No I don't think they do want to educate their National Trust personnel as if the brusque pseudo threats work they are happy to get rid of the drone operator; job done.
They can't get the personnel trained with the correct information as their own website promotes the false ideas that flying over their properties is illegal.

I have been a member for decades and have noticed the NT tend to do what they want regardless of feedback; Take the current process of getting rid of male and female toilet facilities and replacing them with non gender ones. My wife needed these facilities at NT property and found that the previously designated female toilets were re-designated non gender. For those women (quite a few) who didn't want to que with other men, for that one, had a half mile walk back, to reception area. I complained at this in an email and asked if the website would publish which properties were doing this so as to be forewarned; they ignored the comment and told us to phone each property in advance of a visit and ask them what the situation there was! I don't care if non gender facilities are provided if they let women have what they want, too.

Yes agree wholeheartedly, these faceless decision makers have no idea of the stress some of their money saving ideas cause. I think the only way to get attention is to contact them on mass , and resigning from them explaining why. If they truly respect their members , finding lots resigning would make them wonder what we doing wrong and maybe alter their decision makers minds to a more sensible approach, cheers Len

 

[Johnno53]

Just fly within the rules, take off from public land and let them know that you are flying within the rules and that you will bring the drone down when you have taken the footage you want. Let them know that they are welcome to call the police but point out to them that all they would be doing is wasting police time. Also inform them if the police do come you will be putting in a harrassment complaint.

 

[Jamesz]

I'm curious where the '90 foot vertical separation' idea has come from. Sub 250's can overfly people- not crowds - with no designated separation, as long as the flight can be made safely. Am I missing something here?

 

[Yanlisman]

If you are feeling intimated or threatened by their actions, and if you are flying within UK/CAA laws, then YOU can call the police in the interest of YOUR safety and public safety. No need to wait for them to do so.
ABH is a criminal offence, you are in your rights to protect yourself and if they are doing so when you are in control of the UAV then they themselves are also in breach of Aviation law.
Hence 999 is very appropriate in this instance.
Enjoy flying and stay safe.

 

[Mikero]

In May 2022, while holidaying in Rievaulx, North Yokshire, I flew my Mini 2 over Rievaulx Abbey, having taken off from a public road. A woman approached me telling me it was illegal to fly over the Abbey and also that I was infringing the privacy of a farmer and his children who may or may not have been in their garden next to the Abbey. I explained that it was lawful to overfly English Heritage property as long as I took off from a public space and that EH didn't own the air space. I also told her that as the drone was sub 250g, I could overfly the gardens next to the Abbey. I was flying at 400 ft in any case. She told me that she worked for EH and she knew all the rules of the CAA and EH and therefore she was right and I was wrong. No amount of explaining could convince her I was in the right! I continued with my flight, taking some amazing footage of the Abbey even though she threatened me with the police. Needless to say, the police didn't arrive, even though I gave her the address of the holiday cottage we were staying in.
I found out that she was a cleaner in the Abbey tea shop.
Attached is a still photograph from my video.

 

[AlbionDrones]

I'm curious where the '90 foot vertical separation' idea has come from. Sub 250's can overfly people- not crowds - with no designated separation, as long as the flight can be made safely. Am I missing something here?

My error, I thought I saw something about 30m being the minimum separation, and assumed it also included overflight... Need to go back and brush up on my regs methinks...

 

[Viewfinder]

In my professional career I encountered many people who quoted "The Law" and tried to tell me what to do. Fortunately my degree course included a very good grounding in legal studies so even when I was dealing with something new to me I could always find my way around the statute, common, and case law to see whether I was indeed acting unlawfully. I nearly always found that the person telling me what the law is did not in fact know the first thing about the law and was merely a jumped-up little jobsworth. My principal aim in such cases was to use the most efficient method of preventing them from wasting my valuable time. I therefore developed a two stage procedure for dealing with these creatures which I have adapted into a plan for what to do if I ever encounter the problem described by Albion Drones (it hasn't happened yet but I expect it will).

Step 1 - Hand them a printed card stating:
(1) I am a CAA registered Operator and Flyer and I am conducting my operations lawfully under the Air Navigation Order 2016 ("ANO"), the CAA Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace Guidance (CAP 722), and the BMFA Article 16 Authorisation
(2) By distracting the pilot of a UAS they are committing an offence under ANO articles 240 (Endangering safety of an aircraft) and 241 (endangering safety of persons and property)
(3) I will address their complaint after I have landed my UAS and made it safe
(4) if they distract me again during the remainder of the flight I will immediately call the police and make a complaint.
After handing over the card, I will ignore them completely. This is crucial. I will not acknowledge their existence upon this planet. I will not speak to them or even look at them.

Step 2 - After landing and putting the drone in its case, I will hand them exactly what @lensimages described: a copy of the drone code. I will not say anything or answer them whatever they say. I will just leave. By the way, there is absolutely no legal obligation in the UK to provide my name, address, Operator ID or Flyer ID to such a person in such circumstances.

This will achieve the following:
1. I will have a clear record of my response to them - my copies of the two things I have given them.
2. I will have said nothing so I cannot be accused of having said anything. There is no risk that anything might be misunderstood or used against me. The right to remain silent is absolute, and a surprisingly powerful defensive tactic.
3. The jobsworth will be wound up beyond belief and their worthless day will be totally ruined. There is nothing that angers and frustrates an interfering busybody more than being 100% ignored. From a psychological point of view their interference makes them feel important and being ignored pricks that self-important bubble. It makes them feel insignificant, which they hate.

Why would I do the above and not explain myself and try to satisfy the jobsworth with my explanation? Because in 99.9% of cases it's impossible. The sort of person who challenges someone engaged in a lawful activity and invents non-existent law to use as a verbal weapon isn't going to be satisfied with anything less than a grovelling capitulation. It's all about psychology really. And actually knowing the law and flying within the limitations it imposes.

 

[Dronecation]

In my professional career I encountered many people who quoted "The Law" and tried to tell me what to do. Fortunately my degree course included a very good grounding in legal studies so even when I was dealing with something new to me I could always find my way around the statute, common, and case law to see whether I was indeed acting unlawfully. I nearly always found that the person telling me what the law is did not in fact know the first thing about the law and was merely a jumped-up little jobsworth. My principal aim in such cases was to use the most efficient method of preventing them from wasting my valuable time. I therefore developed a two stage procedure for dealing with these creatures which I have adapted into a plan for what to do if I ever encounter the problem described by Albion Drones (it hasn't happened yet but I expect it will).

Step 1 - Hand them a printed card stating:
(1) I am a CAA registered Operator and Flyer and I am conducting my operations lawfully under the Air Navigation Order 2016 ("ANO"), the CAA Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace Guidance (CAP 722), and the BMFA Article 16 Authorisation
(2) By distracting the pilot of a UAS they are committing an offence under ANO articles 240 (Endangering safety of an aircraft) and 241 (endangering safety of persons and property)
(3) I will address their complaint after I have landed my UAS and made it safe
(4) if they distract me again during the remainder of the flight I will immediately call the police and make a complaint.
After handing over the card, I will ignore them completely. This is crucial. I will not acknowledge their existence upon this planet. I will not speak to them or even look at them.

Step 2 - After landing and putting the drone in its case, I will hand them exactly what @lensimages described: a copy of the drone code. I will not say anything or answer them whatever they say. I will just leave. By the way, there is absolutely no legal obligation in the UK to provide my name, address, Operator ID or Flyer ID to such a person in such circumstances.

This will achieve the following:
1. I will have a clear record of my response to them - my copies of the two things I have given them.
2. I will have said nothing so I cannot be accused of having said anything. There is no risk that anything might be misunderstood or used against me. The right to remain silent is absolute, and a surprisingly powerful defensive tactic.
3. The jobsworth will be wound up beyond belief and their worthless day will be totally ruined. There is nothing that angers and frustrates an interfering busybody more than being 100% ignored. From a psychological point of view their interference makes them feel important and being ignored pricks that self-important bubble. It makes them feel insignificant, which they hate.

Why would I do the above and not explain myself and try to satisfy the jobsworth with my explanation? Because in 99.9% of cases it's impossible. The sort of person who challenges someone engaged in a lawful activity and invents non-existent law to use as a verbal weapon isn't going to be satisfied with anything less than a grovelling capitulation. It's all about psychology really. And actually knowing the law and flying within the limitations it imposes.

Spot on!

 

[KI5RLL]

I know that within the UK we have issues with permission to fly in some areas. Due to this we always check NOTAMS for NFZ and no fly requests before visiting an area, and then check on Altitude Angel and DJI Apps before flying - also that there are some landowners stating (incorrectly) that it is illegal to fly over their property (NT / EH / etc), however today while flying my - sub 250gm DJI MINI 3 Pro - over a NT abbey - from public land and staying within the Drone Code guidelines - VLOS, LOAL away from private land, 90ft clearance from any non-involved persons (we were the only people on site) - we were accosted by the just arrived NT warden and told to land immediately and that we were breaking the law as we were flying within 250 yards of a road! Not wanting conflict we did land and left the site, after informing the warden that our drone was sub 250gm, can overfly people and places as long as 90 ft separation vertically was maintained.

I get that they dont want UAV being used over their land, and can use their byelaws to prevent TOAL on their land, but as we all know, they have admitted they cannot stop overflights, however, in this instancce it was the sheer incorrectness of the information he was quoting that took me aback! 250yards - about 750ft - from the nearest paved road was what he 'knew' to be the law...

Seems that the NT have some work to do on educating their staff. I thought the NT was their to hold their assets 'in trust for the nation and for the use and enjoyment of the people of the land', seems to me they are more interested in £££ rather than in allowing decent folks to enjoy the places they are looking after.

TBH I cannot understand the NT, they are missing a trick, they could easily charge a drone fee on top of the site entrance, have it limited to an hour at start of day and end of day, with only 15 minute slots bookable, and specify that you have to be an NT member to fly, but instead they are alienating a potential revenue stream - who are also providing free advertising for their sites - as well as discouraging us from spending money in the local area - something that in these austere times I would think they would want to do.

I know there is a feeling that the Gerneral Public are upset and annoyed by drones flying about, but all I can say is that whenever we have been out flying - legally and according to the Drone Code - we have had nothing but positive interest from those who have come across us. I think the perception is actually far from the truth, most people like to see new things being used - as long as being used safely...

Sorry, just feel a bit down after today, was looking forwards to a few visits, got a couple of good bits of footage, and then accosted by someone who didnt know what he was talking about in such a manner made me feel really anxious and disheartened...

And the next “cop” will have a whole different story and attitude. Same here. Is how they assure the Public they don’t know what they enforce.

 

[Elthree]

She told me that she worked for EH and she knew all the rules of the CAA and EH and therefore she was right and I was wrong. No amount of explaining could convince her I was in the right!

If it comes to claims that someone "knows the rules" like that I point out that I've been certified by the authorities as knowing the rules, which I am abiding by.

Do they have THEIR own pilot's registration/licence to back up their claims?

But I like Viewfinder's approach. Need to work out the equivalent info for each geography/country though.