DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

UK Police and drones being flown in a dangerous manner

@RobertR ,i thinks you should rephrase your thread title
it would be better if it said( UK Police and Drones Being Flown In a Dangerous Manner)
the actual drone itself is not really dangerous ,its the pilot who decides what they want the drone to do ,and how its going to be used
with anything that has the potential to cause harm, its normally the person in charge of that object ,that controls the outcome
i myself have no time for people who do stupid dangerous illegal things with drones ,or anything else for that matter ,and if people do decide to flout the law ,then they deserve all the punishment they get
 
@RobertR ,thankyou for doing that ,i was in no way having a dig at your good-self ,it was the (Dangerous Drones ) part of the title i was referring too
those two words together in a sentence are not good bedfellows
 
Sir Bruce already had a rant on that.
You’re either flying legally or you’re not. If not, in my opinion, you deserve to be prosecuted and can’t really complain if you are. I always think that people ranting about enforcement of the laws suggests that they probably fly illegally and don’t want to have to change their bad habits.
 
You’re either flying legally or you’re not. If not, in my opinion, you deserve to be prosecuted and can’t really complain if you are. I always think that people ranting about enforcement of the laws suggests that they probably fly illegally and don’t want to have to change their bad habits.
Generally you would be correct on various "YouTubers". However if one would follow Bruce he states your view. His rant was on publicity of the BBC and their reporting and wording and the over stepping of government entities who follow such nonsense and react to it to limit our hobby.

He has probably done more than most to help our hobby and has even taken stabs at the FAA for stealing his video content without consent for one of their training videos. He seems to be a equal opportunity "Ranter" when it comes to false reporting and overreach of governing bodies IMHO.

It is people like him that try and stop the nonsense and try and get such enacted rules retracted for the nonsense that are issued by doing no real world data and using the media to make decisions. Besides that...it's a real fun channel to watch normally to see what this hobby used to be without all the hoopla these days. But Anyway I digress, back to the conversation at hand and the poorly worded "news" as the BBC reports it. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: frank candor
It is people like him that try and stop the nonsense and try and get such enacted rules retracted for the nonsense that are issued by doing no real world data and using the media to make decisions.
It certainly doesn’t sound that way from his rambling video. He doesn’t seem to even fully understand the normal rules of the air. He says that drones and aircraft shouldn’t be sharing the same airspace because aircraft shouldn’t be operating below 500ft - there are numerous reasons why aircraft can legitimately operate below 500ft, hence the need for drone regulations.

He asks for statistics about the number of people who’ve been killed by drones and says that without them it’s obviously just about the money (fines). However, many aviation regulations are based on potential danger rather than solely on accident statistics. If the authorities could see that something might be dangerous but waited for someone to die before they introduced regulations, there would be a public outcry. He’s looking at the problem purely from a drone operator point of view.
 
You’re either flying legally or you’re not. If not, in my opinion, you deserve to be prosecuted and can’t really complain if you are. I always think that people ranting about enforcement of the laws suggests that they probably fly illegally and don’t want to have to change their bad habits.
What is the furthest away horizontally, you have ever flown your drone?. If it's more than 600-800 feet, I bet you can't see it and thus have broken VLOS. VLOS is probably the most common broken law and I suspect almost everyone can't follow it in true real world situations. Anyway, About the BBC article. It's insane. This illegitimate fear of drones is ridiculous. These hit pieces attacking drones, NEVER SHOW ANY SUPPORTING STATISTICAL DATA. One person out of a million did this, another out of a million did that, but lets create a task force and waste tax payer money. This gives the government more reasons to ask for increases in their budget and allows them to profit from fining people who are not committing any true criminal acts. The police will confiscate drones? Then guess what they do. If the judge favors the police, the police get a new drone to use in their own fleet. Most of this is about government finding another revenue source. The UK has so many sick laws. DID YOU ALL KNOW, in the UK you need a license or permit to own and or watch television !!. If they think you're illegally watching TV, they will try to illegally enter your home. UK government gets more broken every year. They are like mafia. You have to pay to play in my back yard. I thought the USA was a police state, but the UK is even worse. Well at least when it comes to wasting their time governing harmless human activities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DroneToJoy
  • keep 150m away from built-up areas
What constitutes a built-up area? Oh yes, every city, town, village, farm, etc. Seems rather ambiguous if you ask me...
 
It certainly doesn’t sound that way from his rambling video. He doesn’t seem to even fully understand the normal rules of the air. He says that drones and aircraft shouldn’t be sharing the same airspace because aircraft shouldn’t be operating below 500ft - there are numerous reasons why aircraft can legitimately operate below 500ft, hence the need for drone regulations.

He asks for statistics about the number of people who’ve been killed by drones and says that without them it’s obviously just about the money (fines). However, many aviation regulations are based on potential danger rather than solely on accident statistics. If the authorities could see that something might be dangerous but waited for someone to die before they introduced regulations, there would be a public outcry. He’s looking at the problem purely from a drone operator point of view.
Guess the maker of the vid never heard of helicopters, gliders, hang-gliders, etc. :)
 
thanks for sharing!
 
Due to articles such as the one above, I chose to simply abandon the hobby. It's a shame that, once again, the majority has to be chastised for the actions of the minority. Flying a drone is a lot of fun, but it's just a bit pants now that you have people approaching with the usual, "I'd shoot it from the sky!" or,
"Been near any airports?"

I might buy one again, one day, but for now I'll just let the gov completely control anything and everything we do.

Ever driven at 31 in a 30 area? Shame on you, you should be fined. /s


P.s. Bruce is fantastic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frank candor
Due to articles such as the one above, I chose to simply abandon the hobby. It's a shame that, once again, the majority has to be chastised for the actions of the minority. Flying a drone is a lot of fun, but it's just a bit pants now that you have people approaching with the usual, "I'd shoot it from the sky!" or,
"Been near any airports?"

I might buy one again, one day, but for now I'll just let the gov completely control anything and everything we do.

Ever driven at 31 in a 30 area? Shame on you, you should be fined. /s


P.s. Bruce is fantastic.
I wouldn't let this get me to abandon a hobby that I like. It's not the car that is doing 31 in a 30, it's the driver of the car. Hang in there mate.
 
  • Love
Reactions: projectarjun
These hit pieces attacking drones, NEVER SHOW ANY SUPPORTING STATISTICAL DATA. One person out of a million did this, another out of a million did that, but lets create a task force and waste tax payer money.
You didn’t quote the second part of my post. Many aviation regulations (not just those relating to drones) are based on perceived danger and not necessarily on statistics. If the authorities can see that something could cause an aviation accident (but hasn’t yet), it would be irresponsible of them just sit back and wait for it to happen before they took any action. We might not like the regulations but they are the price we have to pay for sharing the airspace with other aircraft.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howard70
Was it just me that thought the regulations in the BBC article were from pre-open catagory. Larger drones should be 150m from anyone assuming you've not got an A2 CofC?
 
Was it just me that thought the regulations in the BBC article were from pre-open catagory. Larger drones should be 150m from anyone assuming you've not got an A2 CofC?
The standards of journalism these days are pretty poor (not bashing any particular news outfit).

I picked up that it was wrong for my Mini 2, but then thought that if you didn't know this, because you haven't done the test, then it's probably best you keep away from people and objects.
 
@RobertR ,i thinks you should rephrase your thread title
it would be better if it said( UK Police and Drones Being Flown In a Dangerous Manner)
the actual drone itself is not really dangerous ,its the pilot who decides what they want the drone to do ,and how its going to be used
with anything that has the potential to cause harm, its normally the person in charge of that object ,that controls the outcome
i myself have no time for people who do stupid dangerous illegal things with drones ,or anything else for that matter ,and if people do decide to flout the law ,then they deserve all the punishment they get
My immediate reaction to reading the title was that someone was flying the UK police in a dangerous manner. I had visons of lots of bobbies flying erratically through the air!
 

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,600
Messages
1,554,281
Members
159,607
Latest member
Schmidteh121