Mandatory Drone registration in the UK - Respond now in under 60 secs!

[Ian in London]

So for UK fliers and anyone visiting the UK, you'll soon have to register yourself and your drone. But whilst the FAA manages this for $5 for 3 years, the CAA is proposing £16.50 every year!
Not impressed. They want a high take up? Why not offer a free registration controlled and maintained via the apps?
Either way, VOICE YOUR OPINION in under 60 seconds before 7 June 2019, no matter where in the World you're based.

Charge proposal for the UK Drone Registration Scheme - Civil Aviation Authority - Citizen Space

Ian

 

[Exphantomflyer]

Bruce aka XJET did a great piece on this, FYI i filled in the form with my views

 

[Ian in London]

BBC now picking it up... Plans to charge drone owners annual fee

 

[gnirtS]

Disappointing but entirely predictable for the UK sadly. After all, price gouging is actively encouraged. Look at the price of a PfCO compared to other countries (Part 107 etc etc). Its so high its completely prohibitive to get.

For US readers, they're proposing $21.50 a year, every year.

So over a 3 year period US users would pay $15 whereas UK users would pay $64.50 for the same thing.

There is no way they can justify paying 4-5x that rate for essentially the same thing.

A few things too, they claim the ongoing cost is for training and so on. What they forget to mention is that training and most of the other things listed are a one off, one time spend and not a recurrent cost.
Nothing in their document explains how these vague costs they mention are 4-5 higher than elsewhere for the same thing. The UK is not a special case cost wise.

Im entirely in favour of drone registration BUT it must be done on a cost-neutral basis and made as easy as possible for an end user whereas this clearly is not.

It'll also be counter-productive. The annual cost is so high people simply wont bother registering which will have the opposite effect to what they're trying to achieve.

So what do i get for my £16.50 a year ? A small one off registration fee is fair enough.
But what else do i get? Insurance? Nope.
Loosening of restrictions for registered, legal users? No.
Legal help against land owners and illegal bylaws attempt to restrict my usage? Nope

After the first year i dont have get "value" out of that registration fee so i get absolutely zero value for money out of it.
So why would anyone bother?

If they get the claimed 170,000 registrations thats £2.8 million ($3.6 million) a year in income. There is no way thats justifiable as a non-profit operation as they claim. Its a big chunk of income and is pretty much just a drone-tax.

 

[Ian in London]

Disappointing but entirely predictable for the UK sadly. After all, price gouging is actively encouraged. Look at the price of a PfCO compared to other countries (Part 107 etc etc). Its so high its completely prohibitive to get.

For US readers, they're proposing $21.50 a year, every year.

So over a 3 year period US users would pay $15 whereas UK users would pay $64.50 for the same thing.

There is no way they can justify paying 4-5x that rate for essentially the same thing.

A few things too, they claim the ongoing cost is for training and so on. What they forget to mention is that training and most of the other things listed are a one off, one time spend and not a recurrent cost.
Nothing in their document explains how these vague costs they mention are 4-5 higher than elsewhere for the same thing. The UK is not a special case cost wise.

Im entirely in favour of drone registration BUT it must be done on a cost-neutral basis and made as easy as possible for an end user whereas this clearly is not.

It'll also be counter-productive. The annual cost is so high people simply wont bother registering which will have the opposite effect to what they're trying to achieve.

So what do i get for my £16.50 a year ? A small one off registration fee is fair enough.
But what else do i get? Insurance? Nope.
Loosening of restrictions for registered, legal users? No.
Legal help against land owners and illegal bylaws attempt to restrict my usage? Nope

After the first year i dont have get "value" out of that registration fee so i get absolutely zero value for money out of it.
So why would anyone bother?

If they get the claimed 170,000 registrations thats £2.8 million ($3.6 million) a year in income. There is no way thats justifiable as a non-profit operation as they claim. Its a big chunk of income and is pretty much just a drone-tax.

Perfectly put Gnirt. I actually thought the FAA registration was valid for 3 years, fo $5... Either way, they state the government has given them money to set it up, so it's purely for ongoing maintenance, yet they also state the website should require no manual intervention by CAA staff and be fully automated. So where is the ongoing cost? But as mentioned in my video, this could be handled by the apps easily, and directly control the drone's beginner mode if unregistered. But that's common sense.......

 

[FoxhallGH]

There seems to be a justification based on a huge £1Million+ p.a. cost to host and operate a basic on-line database for 170,000 users. That database could be held on a medium sized USB memory stick for goodness sake! The question here is 'who has conned the CAA into believing that this registration process needs an IT server farm like you'd want for a mission to Mars!?'

 

[gnirtS]

The history of UK government IT projects is woeful to say the least.
The London ambulance service project is still taught at universities at degree level as an example of how not to do it.
It's perfectly possible they've been quoted something absolutely ludicrous by a company who just sees pound signs as they know just how inept the government is.

On the scale of things, this is a tiny database and storing a small amount of non sensitive information.
It's a far smaller scale project than companies use every day.

 

[Ian in London]

The history of UK government IT projects is woeful to say the least.
The London ambulance service project is still taught at universities at degree level as an example of how not to do it.
It's perfectly possible they've been quoted something absolutely ludicrous by a company who just sees pound signs as they know just how inept the government is.

On the scale of things, this is a tiny database and storing a small amount of non sensitive information.
It's a far smaller scale project than companies use every day.

You're spot on. But irrespective of how much they think it's going to cost to set up, they actually admit their start up costs have been covered by the government, and the fees are to cover the ongoing costs. For a system they admit should require no manual input from the CAA apart from answering queries... So 170,000 x £16.50 = £2 million.... for occasional questions from confused users.....