Take off and landing from the top of an apartment bullding - handling complaints

[jwilson]

I bought a mini 3 pro recently, passed exam etc. I live at the top of an apartment building, and control my drone from the balcony.

I literally shoot off to the Thames (it’s a few 100ms away) not circling around. I like to enjoy the view with my goggles not even recording.

I received some complaints and warnings from the building that they will call the police and council because I’m spying on them and invade their privacy.

First off, I don’t care (edit: don’t care about their lives, not interested in it, I.e. I have no intentions of spying on people), second, there are many high buildings around, there’s no privacy.

I don’t want to cause any inconvenience to anyone, but I also didn’t spend almost a thousand quid so that someone who cannot bear the thought of a drone existing in the building can have peace.

Any thoughts?

How many people are complaining? I would just keep doing it until the police come. I don't think you're breaking any law.

 

[Split-Infinitive]

How many people are complaining? I would just keep doing it until the police come. I don't think you're breaking any law.

He's using goggles without a spotter. Thats one law broken right there. If the police turn up its an easy prosecution for them.

 

[jwilson]

He's using goggles without a spotter. Thats one law broken right there. If the police turn up its an easy prosecution for them.

Why even use goggles? I never worry about LOS. That's such a stupid law. No drone pilot always keeps LOS. They're looking at their screen.

 

[Split-Infinitive]

Why even use goggles? I never worry about LOS. That's such a stupid law. No drone pilot always keeps LOS. They're looking at their screen.

Interesting claim, What evidence do you have for "no pilot" does that?

Not understanding why goggles needs a spotter highlights an even bigger misunderstanding of how and why the vlos rules exist in the first place.
Clue. Partly to do with zero spacial awareness, peripheral vision and a complete lack of any ability to see the 3D airspace around the drone looking for hazards. And that's just the start of it.
In either case, in the UK and most other countries, goggles without a spotter is a criminal offence so inviting the police to come isn't a very bright idea.

 

[jwilson]

so inviting the police to come isn't a very bright idea.

So everytime you have a dispute with a neighbor, who threatens to call the police, your going to cave to his demands, even though you know the law is on your side? Even if the police came, what would the consequences be? Maybe a small fine. I would take the chance.
As VLOS is concerned, I think this topic has been addressed many times on this forum. You can only see a mavic 3 for around 1,500 feet. So whenever you go further than that, you're violating VLOS. If the FAA is so worried about VLOS, they should limit all drones range to 1,500 feet. How do I know that most pilots spend most of their time looking at their screen? I've never done a survey, because I'm hardly ever around other drone pilots, but I bet a million dollars it's true. I know I spend at leat 95% of my time looking at my screen. I would also say that using binoculars is dumb because it narrows your FOV. That's one reason the helicopter hit the airliner in Washington. Because the choper pilots were flying with night vision goggles, which have a narrow FOV.

 

[Split-Infinitive]

So everytime you have a dispute with a neighbor, who threatens to call the police, your going to cave to his demands, even though you know the law is on your side?

Why is the law on his side? He's using goggles without a spotter. That's a criminal offence.

Even if the police came, what would the consequences be? Maybe a small fine. I would take the chance.

Fine of up to a few thousand pounds and a criminal record that can mess up other things in life is worth a chance?
Why not just comply with the law.

As VLOS is concerned, I think this topic has been addressed many times on this forrum.You can only see a mavic 3 for around 1,500 feet. So whenever you go further than that, you're violating VLOS.

Yes. And? Caa guidance is 500m or so max. Less if required.

If the FAA is so worried about VLOS, they should limit all drones range to 1,500 feet.

There's no such thing as standard eyesight and standard weather. Plus vlos isn't just about seeing the drone. It's seeing everything else.

How do I know that most pilots spend most of their time looking at their screen? I've never done a survey, because I'm hardly ever around other drone pilots, but I bet a million dollars iit'strue. I know I spend at llea% of my time looking at my screen.

So you just made it up. You should have said so.

I would also say that using binoculars is dumb because it narrows your FOV.

Which is why they aren't allowed.

That's one reason the helicopter hit the airliner in Washington. Because the choper pilots were flying with night vision goggles, which have a narrow FOV.

The crap procedures, existance of a terrible corridor, awful atc and phraseology all contributed.

Either way, the guy is in the UK. The laws are clear as defined in cap722 (which you've never heard of, yet alone read).

CAP 722: Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace - Guidance | UK Civil Aviation Authority

Summary information about publication CAP 722

www.caa.co.uk

Answers all your questions.

Goggles without a spotter aren't allowed and they detail what is and isn't classed as vlos.
He's in breach of the law. Inviting the police is dumb.

 

[mavic3usa]

In either case, in the UK and most other countries, goggles without a spotter is a criminal offence so inviting the police to come isn't a very bright idea.

Not quite in the US where we are free and live by the rule of law unlike in the UK. Flying a drone without a spotter might be a federal offense but we don’t have police officers in our country who have the law enforcement powers to cite or arrest drone flyers who break the federal law by flying a drone without a spotter. In other words, there is nothing legal the police can do about it. Only the FAA and federal law enforcement can do this which is why we likely have zero such cases in the US. We don’t want the potential for thousands of such silly cases in the US from bored untrained cops who have nothing better to do so we deny them the power to arrest for breaking drone laws but I understand the UK police can cite the British citizens for pretty much anything; that’s too bad and sucks for you but not surprised because subjects are just that. No offense.

 

[Meta4]

Not quite in the US where we are free and live by the rule of law unlike in the UK.

As is often the case, you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[jwilson]

Why is the law on his side? He's using goggles without a spotter. That's a criminal offence.


Fine of up to a few thousand pounds and a criminal record that can mess up other things in life is worth a chance?
Why not just comply with the law.



Yes. And? Caa guidance is 500m or so max. Less if required.


There's no such thing as standard eyesight and standard weather. Plus vlos isn't just about seeing the drone. It's seeing everything else.


So you just made it up. You should have said so.


Which is why they aren't allowed.



The crap procedures, existance of a terrible corridor, awful atc and phraseology all contributed.

Either way, the guy is in the UK. The laws are clear as defined in cap722 (which you've never heard of, yet alone read).

CAP 722: Unmanned Aircraft System Operations in UK Airspace - Guidance | UK Civil Aviation Authority

Summary information about publication CAP 722

www.caa.co.uk

Answers all your questions.

Goggles without a spotter aren't allowed and they detail what is and isn't classed as vlos.
He's in breach of the law. Inviting the police is dumb.

I agree he shouldn't be using binoculars, which is the correct term, not goggles. Those are for swimming. If the police knock on his door, which will probably never happen, he can put the binoculars down. This crime would never be a felony. It would be more like a parking ticket. Criminal record? No way. In the history of drones, has anyone ever used a spotter? I doubt it.
What are you looking for? Buildings or aircraft? Aircraft must be above 1,000 feet and buildings would be detected by obstacle avoidance. I'm sure you've read all of cap722! Not.
Well, show me a study that says most pilots are looking at their drones most of the time?

 

[Split-Infinitive]

I agree he shouldn't be using binoculars, which is the correct term, not goggles.

Binoculars or FPV goggles. Both would be illegal. Doesnt matter.

f the police knock on his door, which will probably never happen,

Why would you say that? If a report is made they have to investigate.

he can put the binoculars down.

And if his flight logs show him to be more than 500m or so it doesnt matter. Its VLOS.

This crime would never be a felony.

Its clear you haven't got the slightest clue about UK law. We dont have "felony". Its a criminal offence. As set out in the Air Navigation Order.

It would be more like a parking ticket. Criminal record? No way.

Lets make this simple as you clearly have problems comprehending it. Its a criminal offence. If you're convicted of a criminal offence you get a criminal record. The Air Navigation Order (which again you've never heard of and never read) details it all.

In the history of drones, has anyone ever used a spotter? I doubt it.

We'll add this to the "JWilson giant book of stuff i just made up" shall we?

What are you looking for? Buildings or aircraft?

Amongst other things yes. But not only that. Again shows you have no concept as to what VLOS is and why.

Aircraft must be above 1,000 feet

Whatever you're smoking you should probably stop. The hallucinations are rotting your brain rapidly.

I'm sure you've read all of cap722!

All the relevant sections yes. And for good reason.

Not.
Well, show me a study that says most pilots are looking at their drones most of the time?

Thats not it works. You made a claim. Back it up.


I guess there must be some reward you can have for getting the most things wrong in a single post in history.


Air Navigation Order 2016 | UK Civil Aviation Authority There you go. After that there are the amendments. You might learn something.

 

[MS Coast]

Not quite in the US where we are free and live by the rule of law unlike in the UK.

Wait. Aren't you the guy who frequently says that

• big government in the US is enthusiastically persecuting drone pilots,
• law enforcement in the US if corrupt and routinely entraps sober drivers for DUI,
• there are criminals monitoring RID broadcasts so they can ambush drone pilots,
• you are actively fighting the US government to protect the rights of citizens,
• you are actively fighting new drone regulations that federal, state, and local governments are trying to impose on citizens
• that there are places in the US that are so crime ridden they're not safe to visit?

 

[mavic3usa]

Wait. Aren't you the guy who frequently says that

• big government in the US is enthusiastically persecuting drone pilots,
• law enforcement in the US if corrupt and routinely entraps sober drivers for DUI,
• there are criminals monitoring RID broadcasts so they can ambush drone pilots,
• you are actively fighting the US government to protect the rights of citizens,
• you are actively fighting new drone regulations that federal, state, and local governments are trying to impose on citizens
• that there are places in the US that are so crime ridden they're not safe to visit?

The US government is fine; just you and few of your friends who don’t understand and respect the Constitution that keeps us working overtime trying to prevent you from victimizing the innocent and honest citizens in this country. Taking advantage of the system and once you get a little power, you substitute your own personal beliefs and agenda and you oppress people you don’t like, that’s what I frequently talk about.

 

[MS Coast]

The US government is fine; just you and few of your friends who don’t understand and respect the Constitution that keeps us working overtime trying to prevent you from victimizing the innocent and honest citizens in this country.

I hadn't realized that I was the source of all the problems. You should have said something earlier.

 

[DoomMeister]

Has become a battleground thread. Time to employ the Dome of Silence.