Drone users face new rules across Europe and UK
bbc.co.uk
bbc.co.uk
The annoying part right now though is that while we are figuring it all out, regulations are changing fast and often. It seems you could almost buy a drone and be in different legal framework by the time you fly it. Certainly inside one season the reasonably expensive (for us) dji my friend and I bought halvsies went from completely unencumbered to needing licensing because it was over 250g. In USA it seems they went through a few frameworks last few years as well. Which I understand, it's a new territory and moving fast... Just makes it a bit tricky to stay informed, legal and compliant.
How does this work for home-made drones? You wouldn't have a CE mark.
A home-made drone would presumably still need to follow the same relevant regulations.
https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP2003_EU_Drone_Rules_... includes a reference to drones that are "privately-built and less than 250g"
That could be the difference between having to register a ~30g 'Tiny Whoop' style drone or not.
I 'home-made' an iPhone app and gave it a CE mark myself.
How complicated did you expect me to get in a HN comment?
But I believe it's fact - medical software that measures or calculates on an iPhone gives you a medical device, and a medical device needs to be regulated in the UK, EU, and most other places. I was on the team that did among the first work on regulating this properly.
There are likely to be relevant standards for drones to get them CE certified.
https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unmanned-aircraft/Recreation...
I agree the rules are annoyingly confusing and the information is spread piecemeal over multiple documents. They should fix that.
Look at the insanity that is possible with training and skill, no cameras needed: https://youtu.be/PptMrBFAO-A
One could be the camera platform, another with a larger battery....
You only need insurance for commercial operations.
All they require in exchange is registration for £9/year. The sub 250g drones don’t require you to do the online certification or get a flyer ID.
London still has a bunch of special security zones you can’t fly in, so you won’t be getting any nice shots of Canary Wharf, but it does open things up a lot. I’m concerned that the police won’t be up to date with the new regulations though, and apparently they can just seize your equipment and make it very painful to get back.
I could very much be mistaken, but I thought the special rules regarding <250g drones only apply if the drone does not have a camera. The DJI Mini does.
For sub 250g drones without a camera, you don’t need either of these. If it does have a camera, you need an operator ID but not a flyer ID. So you have to fill out a form with your name and address, and stick the ID to your drone, but there’s no certification element like there is when you have a heavier drone and need a flyer ID too.
Our public spaces and the environment and nature is a shared space, and you cannot do whatever you feel like in a space we share if its disturbing, neither should and can I.
If we're talking about that one developed country where everybody and their grandmother carries a gun, I get the feeling geofencing them would not be a popular measure.
But yeah, in principle this is totally a thing we should do.
We haven’t before now had the technology to do that in a way that wouldn’t violate other rights, but the technology is shifting in such a way that there are domains where we will have that ability and of course we should do it.
The only reason anybody objects to this is because, again, we used to live in a world where you’d have to do something objectionable to achieve these goals, but as that becomes less true the objections will seem increasingly absurd.
Our intuitions in this space lag reality.
Geofencing a car on public roads doesn’t eliminate any legal uses of the car. It doesn’t violate any rights or freedoms. It doesn’t involve any interesting tradeoffs or compromises. It’s a commonsense banality.
This claim shocks people, but that’s just because we used to live in a world where you’d have to do something objectionable to achieve these kinds of goals. But that’s increasingly not true; our intuitions just haven’t caught up to this new reality.
(Obviously, by the way, that’s why your examples aren’t equivalent. I don’t want to chip your brain or your computer, because that would entail an objectionable limitation. Preventing you from speeding in your car on a public right-of-way does not require any objectionable limitation. It only seems like it might, because we’re used to thinking there’s no way you could prevent these kinds of things without doing something objectionable.)
You buy a small drone for fun. Next, you need to register it, then take some online test periodically, then pay yearly insurance fee, later you'll be required for the drone to register with a mobile network to track its use. All for a thing you might use 2-3 times a year on average. If you managed to buy a DJI drone, it might be confiscated upon entering the US. I'd say it's over for this hobby as well as for drone manufacturers.
Why would that be the case?
Who will inform them they only left the EU, and they can’t actually ever leave Europe?
The article is from the UK, where 'Europe' colloquially means the rest of the continent distinct from the UK. Actually so does just 'continent' and 'continental' on its own. This isn't an ignorance thing, or a Brexit thing, it's been this way as long as I've been around, long before anyone was seriously suggesting we leave.
It's just a contraction. People on both sides of the debate or with no opinion use it. I think you're making it out to be a bigger deal or something nefarious when it's just a short-hand of speech.
Nobody is confused by what the author means, except people pretending to be so.
I also wonder how the IDs will work, are they just written on the drone or do they need to have transponders like aircraft? I feel like transponders are the only way they could effectively enforce the rules.
Sounds like written, sticker, embossed, etc. is all you need.
"You must display your operator ID on your drones and model aircraft. "
I am thinking more at idiots or negligent people not criminals or terrorists. If you cause some damages with your toy drone you will have no choice but to admit and pay for them and hopefully you get less idiots risking other people health with their toy hobby or commercial stuff.
Probably the same way the US requires them to be numbered:
https://www.faa.gov/uas/getting_started/register_drone/media...
The scenario I see happening with drones is people crashing them by mistake on innocents heads or property causing damages, since the drone crashed police can read it's serial number and see who the owner is.
> since the drone crashed police can read it's serial number and see who the owner is.
Not from the serial number -- but from the pilot's operator ID they received at registration, and then affixed to the side of their drone.
Those who are apathetic to the rules, or actively flout them may simply take their drone out of the box and fly it.
Do you refer to drones only or in general? If in general you think car license plates are useless?
> They're probably also the least likely to cause trouble or run from the consequences of their actions
Any data or is an opinion?
Btw most car related accidents are happening when people do not follow the rules like respecting the speed limit, or not using a phone so why would they follow the "accept the consequences of your actions" rule if they could get away?
You won't stop criminals using drones by forcing hobbyists to register even their ~30g 'Tiny Whoop' drones.
Not sure it'll even have much impact on careless/reckless flying, as the people doing that are the sort of people who probably won't even read the rules before playing with their shiny new toy right next to an airport on a windy day...
No, if criminals are going to steal drones because of registration requirements, what that does is add another crime, that will often be detected earlier than the major crime they intend to commit and which adds to the probability that there will be sufficient evidence to convict them of at least one crime.
The argument for drone registration is, "there exist people who do dangerous things with drones, and we need laws to protect us from them."
A license plate is not a safety measure. Seatbelts are a safety measure.
Exerting petty licensing and a spaghetti network of regulations to obey just gives you a false sense of control.
Putting regulations in place removes most of the problems because most people and drone manufacturers will follow them. There is always a minority who does not, from idiots to criminals, and that's why we have the police to enforce the law.
License plates do make enforcement laws and regulations easier by the way, and thus do help protect everyone.
The fact that they have to be registered is annoying and we could do without, but understandable. Most things that occupy the air have to be registered, since there's a high possibility of catastrophe.
They also mean that a drone which is blatantly unsafe can now be legally confiscated.
Lastly they provide extra options for punishment when someone is injured because the regulations were ignored. Though an increase in punishment doesn't have much impact on the incidents of a crime, it does have some.
Some people get away with murder, so lets not make it a crime as these laws just give you a false sense of control! <- It's a silly argument.