UK CAA consultation for proposed changes to the rules and regs

[old man mavic]

the consultation paper just opened by the UK CAA ,has some quite interesting parts in it, for those of us flying in the present open category
some of them are going to be welcomed changes, while equally many of them are not so welcome
but it it is important, that as many drone flyers as possible, respond to the consultation,here in the UK to what is being proposed

 

[mavic3usa]

An overview for those are interested in a longer discussion and different points of view:

 

[scro]

Thanks for bringing this to my attention @old man mavic

Here's a link to the online response form and some further documentation about the review. I'd encourage any UK pilots to have a read/fill in the online response form - this is our opportunity to ensure we steer the CAA towards fair and sensible rules for drones.

Review of UK UAS Regulations - Civil Aviation Authority - Citizen Space

Find and participate in consultations run by the Civil Aviation Authority.

consultations.caa.co.uk

 

[Felix le Chat]

the consultation paper just opened by the UK CAA ,has some quite interesting parts in it, for those of us flying in the present open category
some of them are going to be welcomed changes, while equally many of them are not so welcome
but it it is important, that as many drone flyers as possible, respond to the consultation,here in the UK to what is being proposed

I noticed that the shadowy 'Stakeholders' are mentioned yet again.

Listed below are nine of the ghostly 'Stakeholders' referred to in CAA literature. All of whom have been working constantly for the last 6 years to develop the legal and regulatory framework. How many of the 'Stakeholders' represent the grass-roots drone community? None.


Airbus
Airmap
Altitude Angel
Bluebear Systems Research
Collins Aerospace
DJI
Google’s Wing
Thales
Unifly

Spot the trend? Yes... they all represent big commercial concerns. The interesting one is Altitude Angel - Read through their Guardian UTM web page to discover their attitude towards recreational drone users. This consultation just pays lip-service to those of us who use privately owned drones for pleasure and small-scale sole operator business purposes.

 

[old man mavic]

@Felix le Chat, lets be brutally honest about such consultations and their outcomes
at the end of the day the government rule makers, will do whatever is in their best interests,when it comes down to it ,but they have to be shown to be fair to all interested parties
but that doesnt mean we should just lie down and take whatever scraps are thrown to us
in this day and age, accountability is coming under increased scrutiny, so its important that those of us in the world of recreational UAS ,have a chance to put our views across,whether or not those views are listened to or acted upon ,is sadly out of our hands

 

[Yorkshire_Pud]

the consultation paper just opened by the UK CAA ,has some quite interesting parts in it, for those of us flying in the present open category
some of them are going to be welcomed changes, while equally many of them are not so welcome
but it it is important, that as many drone flyers as possible, respond to the consultation,here in the UK to what is being proposed

And what is you interpretation of the forthcoming alterations please OMM?

I am more inclined to believe what you say than I am to believe a youtube.

 

[old man mavic]

@Yorkshire_Pud well firstly i apreciate your comments and i will give some of my thoughts about what is being proposed ,these are purely my interpretation of whats being muted,aspecially as far as the open category revisions are concerned
simplifying the rules and changing the open category names for different weight class of drone
is a positive thing,as hopefully it will be easier to understand
aligning some of the C class marks, to better match those ,of what is already in place in many of the EU countries will be a good idea
RID is something, that needs a lot of careful planning, and understanding of the implications,that having access to a RPs position when they are flying, and being able to locate that pilot and confront them ,is not something i would be happy with ,and i expressed my reasons why in my reply in the relevent part of the consultation
i have no issue with what RID should be used for, to aprehend those persons using a drone for nefarios puposes, or flying in restricted airspace, and i dont mind there being an App that can show a drone being flown, that is broadcasting a unique serial number,that is applicable to the drone that i am flying only
because in the event of someone using that App, to report my drone being flown ,then they would give the number to the authorities who would then know from that number and have the facilty to pinpoint my location, if they so wanted to
regarding an extention to the transitional period, proposed to last to 2028 for legacy drones,then it will allow those drones to keep on flying as they are now ,there is one point which i raised with regards to the holders of the A 2 C of C currently being phased out at the end of 2025,about extending that date as well
with regards to users of the UAS airspace, i also said i did not want the recreational flyers in that airspace to be marginalised ,by the interests of commercial operators , to the point that there will be very little places to fly any class of drone anymore
these are my personal views and sorry the post turned out to be so long

 

[Felix le Chat]

@Felix le Chat, lets be brutally honest about such consultations and their outcomes
at the end of the day the government rule makers, will do whatever is in their best interests,when it comes down to it ,but they have to be shown to be fair to all interested parties
but that doesnt mean we should just lie down and take whatever scraps are thrown to us
in this day and age, accountability is coming under increased scrutiny, so its important that those of us in the world of recreational UAS ,have a chance to put our views across,whether or not those views are listened to or acted upon ,is sadly out of our hands

As with pretty much everything in the world, it isn't the bureaucrats who steer regulation or legislation. It is the lobbyists who bend the framework to best advantage. In this case: the lobbyists (stakeholders) all represent the interests of commercial industry from Airbus and Google Wing with the drone taxis and deliveries to Altitude Angel with their monopoly on how the airspace gets monetized. What WE need, something that would never be allowed by the other 'stakeholders' is a kosher seat at the table and a genuine voice that would be listened to.