Sub 250g drone rules for flying near buildings

[scro]

I've had a couple of interesting scenarios where I've wanted to take some drone footage in or near 2 ports (I'm directly involved in what I was wanting to film/photograph). One port authority was quite unhelpful and demanded that I fly my sub250g drone in the specific category (their policy was still based on the old UK regs). The other Port authority were very friendly and just asked for registration details, risk assessment and flight plan (reasonable request, and were easy to pull together and provide). Flights at the friendly port were done directly from the boat I was interested in and I got some cracking footage.

What I ended up doing for the unfriendly port was to forget liaising with them and collaborating, since they weren't willing to collaborate, and just fly exclusively from public land outside their boundaries, and specifically not actually fly over their land (maybe I could have flown over?!). With this constraint I was able to replan my flights and get good shots/footage all the same.

I'm sorely tempted to get back in touch with Unfriendly Port and say something along the lines of "surely its in your interest to collaborate and work with drone pilots than be awkward and have drones flying on your doorstep that you know nothing about?"

 

[SpitFire]

Welcome to the forum from Chicago the Windy City.
FLY SAFE

 

[Niggy]

Hi everyone.
I thought I might as well use my first post to point out that Trespass, in the UK, is a civil matter and not as such, a matter for 'the authorities.'
A farmer, for instance, can take out a civil complaint against anyone trespassing physically on their land, but in order to make a successful civil prosecution, the trespasser would probably also have to be aggressive, refuse to leave said land or to cause damage interfere with the everyday running of the business etc.
It's complex, but straight in-and-out trespass to reclaim a broken £1000 drone lying on the ground shouldn't really be a problem. I'd risk it.

As far as permissions and overflights go, one could do worse than to follow some of the self-styled auditors that are all over YouTube. I won't name any here but searching for them should be easy enough.

Fair warning.
They are not everyone's cup of tea but, like them or not, they are testing the boundaries of the laws, both of trespass and concerning where Sub-250gram drones are allowed to fly.

Then, one could contact the police oneself. Every station will have or will have access to, their own trained drone pilots who should be happy enough to answer any questions one has regarding drones and the law. Or the CAA of course.


Note:
[All the above is opinion only. Mine. So don't go getting in deep doo-do on my say-so. I was only a welder/fabricator when I was working. What do I know about anything?]


P.S.
It's lovely to be here folks. I'm about to take a deep-dive into what's on offer. many thanks for being here.

 

[Deleted member 119987]

Heres another question.

I just got a reply from a farm that grows lavender. I thought it would be nice to film and take photos of some growing but I just received an email from them saying:

“Hello,

Thank you for your email.

Unfortunately, we do not allow the use of drones anywhere on the farm.

Sorry for any disappointment.”


So does this just mean they don’t allow drones to launch from/land on their farm. Do they have any say about what flies over the farm or fields if I took off from a public road and flew over their fields then landed on public road?

For me, if a land owner has asked me to NOT fly any drone over his property, I would most likely move on and respect his request. Last thing you really want to do is p*ss them off.

 

[Yorkshire_Pud]

As far as permissions and overflights go, one could do worse than to follow some of the self-styled auditors that are all over YouTube. I won't name any here but searching for them should be easy enough.

One point, if doing that use you tubers flying in your country, citing American law or American Youtubers would do beep-beep-all in a British court and vice versa.
Then again some you tubers are rear orifices.
Without citing which you tubers you mean how if someone, who is looking for education, to know who is telling the truth and who is talking poop.

Self styled auditors seem to be out to provoke confrontation. And on that point I saw this piece on the BBC Arizona to ban people filming police officers within 8 feet today.
I wonder how long it will take take for the self styled auditors to prompt similar measures with regards to drones.

 

[old man mavic]

actually the self styled auditors mentioned ,in some of the posts ,are doing nothing at all, to further the acceptance of drones ,they are invoking the right to film anything that they can see from a public place ,the drone is just a tool that they use, because the sub 250 g drones are free from some of the distance restrictions ,that larger drones have

 

[Cymru]

Common sense needs to apply. Sometimes just because you CAN do something doesn't mean you should.

Filming a church at 6am when theres nobody around maybe fine, doing the same at 12pm with a load of people around maybe legal but also may not be very nice.

Legally its quite simple - if the takeoff/landing is legal as per land owner you can fly it wherever you want provided you adhere to the CAP (so vlos, height limits etc per class).

Although a landowner doesn't own the airspace, if its big enough land you'd find it hard to fly over whilst complying with vlos and other rules, especially for a small footprint C0/C1 drone.

Also common sense, i wouldn't fly it near anything fragile or delicate like windows just in case something went wrong.

Finally, be aware that following the drone code doesn't exempt from other laws such as privacy, security concerns, harassment, public nuisance etc so again have a think before doing something.
The new rules for A1 are very nice for operation but acting responsibly is needed to make sure they don't get tightened.

 

[lookout]

But since the impact vector is low on a sub250g quad, you still can't fly over people or moving vehicles? At least in the US they allowed flight over people and night flight only as a part of part 89. Doesn't exactly make sense. So if a sub250g hits the ground from 100ft or 400ft we're still good? Terminal velocity might prevent it from getting any worse impact ratio.

The other problem with buildings is the tall ones create wind even on a calm day.

 

[nigel]

@Aerophile ,what you say is exactly the issue we all have ,when it comes to making a decision of whether or not to fly at a certain location
and the regulations dont make that decision any easier ,all we can do is to make sure that as far as humanly possible ,we have observed any flight restrictions that may be in force,made sure that the drone we are flying, is applicable to the location ,and that the flight can be carried out safely within the spirit of the regulations

a bloke on youtube called DJ AUDITS worth a watch he flies over factories and all sorts worth watching a few to see how he handles property owners and the police

 

[old man mavic]

@nigel ,basically he follows the second paragraph,of my post #20 of this thread,which you replied to above,and one of the reasons,for using an under 250g drone in the first place

 

[lookout]

One point, if doing that use you tubers flying in your country, citing American law or American Youtubers would do beep-beep-all in a British court and vice versa.
Then again some you tubers are rear orifices.
Without citing which you tubers you mean how if someone, who is looking for education, to know who is telling the truth and who is talking poop.

Self styled auditors seem to be out to provoke confrontation. And on that point I saw this piece on the BBC Arizona to ban people filming police officers within 8 feet today.
I wonder how long it will take take for the self styled auditors to prompt similar measures with regards to drones.

Police officers are already fussy about being filmed. That was well before quads came along.