CAA Call for Input Main Points: How to Respond in under 10 Mins
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 08. 2023
- #dji
I explain the main points of the CAA Call for Input and explain how to respond in under 10 minutes. They are talking about the possibility of Remote ID for historical and current flights to let them fines and convictions.
I explain the main points and how I responded.
Background Document: CAP 2569:
publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapp...
Online Response Form:
consultations.caa.co.uk/rpas/...
Email direct: uasregulatoryreview@caa.co.uk
- Check the pinned comment for full text of my responses....
**
Thinking of getting a DJI Drone? Help me & my channel by clicking through to DJI or Amazon to look at their offers.
DJI Mini 3 Pro: click.dji.com/AEuZkXQPaPK75Dh...
DJI Air 3: click.dji.com/AFAzwZgAJGcTYjc...
DJI Mavic 3 Classic: click.dji.com/ALfKaszpfV6Wgd5...
DJI Avata: click.dji.com/AMZ3lRuVyaJYSKL...
Useful Stuff I use:
Anker 32W USB C Fast Charger for Mini2 & Mini 3s: amzn.to/3BqeqSJ
Omnicharge 20c+Powerbank: amzn.to/3S2FOxc
Sandisk Ultra high speed write: amzn.to/2QRsxdg
DJI Radio Mic: store.dji.com/uk/product/dji-mic
Ultra fast USB Flash Drive: amzn.to/2UJiSJK
Freewell ND Filters: amzn.to/3WB2DJZ
Anker Portable Power station for charging: amzn.to/3I5qzQ2
Affiliate links don't cost you any more but do give my channel a small
commission which helps me buy more stuff to test and review for you.
** I disable mid-roll adverts on my videos to make things nicer to watch! You can buy me a beer or coffee at www.buymeacoffee.com/ianinlondon
or
www.paypal.me/Ianinlondon1
or better still, join my channel at czcams.com/users/ianinlondonjoin
**
Images in multiple formats with easy shipping to USA, UK & Worldwide:
fineartamerica.com/profiles/i...
** The excellent Drone Scene app: dronescene.co.uk/
Now with 12 months £5m public liability insurance & access to all features for just £25 a year:
Get 10% off with code "IanInLondon": greyarro.ws/faq#insurance
All run by the most useful & friendliest UK-based Grey Arrows Drone Club:
greyarro.ws/
Music in today's video: Epidemic Sound
Use the link for a free trial: www.epidemicsound.com/referra...
Happy flying everyone.... Ian - Věda a technologie
Email direct: uasregulatoryreview@caa.co.uk
Anyone can and must take the survey. Don't copy and paste; think of your own answers, but here's my answers in full to help you out.....
>>
Q1.
Neither agree nor disagree
It's not clear exactly what the so-called evolving security and safety risks actually are, as no evidence is shown, but the fact remains that the majority of
users and flights are consumers flying intelligent, GPS lightweight (sub 1Kg) drones and therefore should benefit from the simplest categories and rules.
Q2: Should CAA adopt the following policy objectives for operational requirements and why?
Mitigate safety and security risks: No, to an extent
User-centric: Definitely yes
Enforceable: Yes, to an extent
Growth enabling: Yes, to an extent
Scalable: Yes, to an extent
Overall, existing rules and regulations could be sufficient, especially if more use of geo-fencing is made for sensitive areas. Mitigation should only be on a
proportional basis, based on actual evidence. Enforcement should again be proportional and only target those with a clear intention on disruption or
misuse, and not penalise users making simple errors.
Q3 Do you value international alignment in operational requirements, and why?
Yes, to an extent
International alignment makes things easier for visitors and crucially, will keep functionality uniform, without having to have different restrictions based
on different countries. We don’t have to follow them exactly and a slight divergence may allow for more freedom to fly based on intelligent design and
geo-restrictions.
Q4 Should CAA re-name operational categories and sub-categories (Opportunity 1) and why?
Yes, to an extent:
Only to make the names more meaningful. The term Open Category is as simple as it gets, but having sub categories called A1 A2 and A3 means nothing
to anyone, so yes, call them what they are: Over, Near or Far away
Q 5 Should CAA simplify how operational requirements are categorised (Opportunity 2) and why?
Definitely no
Keep rules for flying over people in congested areas separate from flights for far away from people in open countryside.
Q6 Should CAA update how model aircraft operations are regulated (Opportunity 3) and why?
Definitely yes
Model Aircraft, when flown / controlled directly from a flying club location, should absolutely have separate regulations as they present different technical
abilities, lower risk and usually higher flying skills of the operator.
Q7 Should CAA simplify exclusions from operational requirements (Opportunity 4) and why? Please describe any alternative exclusions that should be considered.
Definitely no
These small drones pose a near negligible threat to safety and their use is widespread. Reliance on geo-restrictions should be increased to avoid sensitive
areas.
If it has a camera, it is not a toy and must have gps awareness.
Q8 Should CAA change transitional arrangements for users of UAS without class-marks (Opportunity 5) and why?
Yes, to an extent
There is no evidence to suggest that a drone bought today will suddenly become dangerous after 2026. The CAA abandoned C-classifications before they
had an alternative, which is already unfair to all UK flyers of these newer models with C1 label. So the transition arrangements should be changed to permit C-1 labelled drones to have the same freedoms enjoyed in Europe.
If NEW designs come out with new class markings that permit new exemptions or more freedom, then those new permissions can apply to those new models
Q9 Do you agree with the issues identified by stakeholders relating to product requirements, and why?
Definitely disagree
You don't advise who the stakeholders are, but fundamentally, the class markings are quite simple, with C0 and C1 models making up the vast majority of
models flown by amateurs and even professionals. These models already have specific technical requirements that have safety at their core, and are
accepted throughout Europe and cause very little confusion. What is trying to be fixed here?
Q10 Should CAA adopt the following policy objectives for product requirements, and why?
Mitigates safety and security risks: No, to an extent
User-centric: Definitely yes
Growth enabling: Definitely yes
Scalable: Definitely yes
Internationally aligned: Yes, to an extent
People intent on doing bad will always find ways to mis-use equipment. Mis-use of UAS can be summarised by flying a larger model too close to people -
smaller models present practically no risk here. And for criminals or so called auditors, then make more use of geo-restrictions help mitigate this. The
requirement for C0 sub 250 gram drones to have gps-awareness and comply with geo-fencing seems the easiest and least intrusive solution here.
Q 11 Should CAA implement manufacturer standards (Opportunity 8) and why?
Yes, to an extent
There is already a universally understood class system, where C0 and C1 cover almost all consumer drones bought today. It is wrong to combine these
and capture much heavier, riskier models. Just re-implement the EASA based C0 - C4 classes as these are understood and clear, and specifically focus on
C0 and C1 as these make up most models.
Q12 Should CAA implement a product labelling scheme (Opportunity 9) and why?
Yes, to an extent
Based on existing EASA based numeric C0-C4 labels.
Q13 Should CAA simplify exclusions from product requirements (Opportunity 10) and why?
Definitely no
The current exemptions for flying C0 models are fine; the only additional requirement should be the imposition of geo-awareness. The CAA’s role is to ensure safety in the skies, not enforce what information is captured; that’s for other agencies like the police to enforce. If police stations are considered
sensitive, then these should be geo-protected like prisons.
The safety risks posed by sub 250 grams drones are negligible, based on the total lack of incidents caused by them. The popularity of these small models should not be impacted by the actions of a tiny minority of users.
Q14 Should CAA implement Remote ID (Opportunity 11) and why?
Definitely no
Remote ID does not assist with flight safety in any way and is, in the CAA’s own words, simply a tool for re-education, fines or conviction.
Enforced geo-fencing is less intrusive to assist compliance with avoiding sensitive areas. Such data capturing of all car movements and driving would not
be permitted. There would be universal outrage if this was to be implemented for cars.
The CAA must stick to flight safety, not persecution and data harvesting.
Q 15 Should CAA to implement geo-awareness (Opportunity 12) and why?
Definitely yes
This is the key to preventing unauthorised flights by unsuspecting users. In my opinion all models, including sub-250 gram models with cameras, should have geo-awareness required. But at the same time, the geo-restricted areas programmed in need to better aligned with the actual areas restricted.
Height-based geo-restrictions are also under-used but could help massively. A drone flown under 30 metres high is no threat to any other aircraft, so height restrictions should be more widely used to allow more flow-level flying in more areas.
Q 16 Should CAA introduce requirements for manufacturers to provide user guidance during product set-up or pre-flight, via the controller or other interface (Opportunity 13) and why?
Definitely yes
You don’t drive a car without learning; basic user guidance makes perfect sense and is already present on all new DJI drones as part of the set up process.
Q17 Should CAA introduce user validation requirements on manufacturers (Opportunity 14) and why?
No, to an extent
You are mixing technologies and data from different bodies. You have to be able to register more than one drone against the same ID, so you will end up
with generic IDs posted online and the verification will be meaningless.
Q18 Should CAA simplify policy and guidance document structure (Opportunity 15) and why?
Definitely yes
Yes I would be very happy to see anything that simplifies and clarifies the rules for flying drones. I look at the rules for paragliding (they have none of the regulations that drones have) and I genuinely wonder why, given the near total lack of any real incident involving a drone, why does the CAA keep running
around tying itself in knots about the threats of drones that simply hasn’t materialised.
Q 19 What other opportunities to improve UAS regulation, beyond those described in this Call for Input, would you like to see progressed?
What other opportunities to improve UAS regulation, beyond those described in this Call for Input, would you like to see progressed?:
- Make the rules for smaller drones under 1 Kg simpler.
- Clarify VLOS and make it more relevant, based on seeing the area you’re flying in, not being able to see which way the drone is pointing. If there is any
danger from an approaching aircraft, DOWN is the only way you need to fly, so the current VLOS requirements are useless and risk being ignored by the
masses. - Bring in lower height restrictions to let smaller drones fly in more places.
- Use geo-restrictions to stop them flying near sensitive areas.
And above all, make policy based on evidence, not paranoia.
Thanks for the concise summary, Ian 👍🏻
I couldn't put it better than you have, and not wanting to copy this, ChatGPT has helped reword it
Thanks for the videos and Pinned comment. Super helpful.
Can this comment be copied and printed? If so, how?
Massive thanks for this Ian. I've just done my response (and complained within about the confusing style of the feedback form), so hopefully everyone can do the same and ensure that end users are taken into account with any changes in the future (not that I hold out much hope!).
The form did take me about an hour to think about and do though, which is crazy as (probably on purpose) it will put a lot of people off :(
Worth doing though! and your explanations and answers certainly helped!
It’s all heading in one direction Ian, thanks to the ignorant people who miss use drones, I have come across so many drone owners who have no idea of any rules or even registering and think it’s a free for all no idea about VLOS, they have no interest in doing things properly, I’ve kept my Mini 3 pro sold my other drones, give up doing drone work gone back building. I sympathise with you so much.
Thanks for your hard (and tedious!) work in dissecting this questionnaire, Ian. I have just submitted my response. Talk about over-complicating a problem that in essence doesn't really exist to any significant extent! I agree that we MUST be active in defending the freedoms of all responsible drone users. We must not allow those miscreants who knowingly use their drones to annoy others for entertainment purposes to be the driver for blunt, unethical and unfair rule changes. Businesses should be educated about drone use and then simply not engage with the so-called auditors (or as you suggest play loud, copyrightable music music if they DO engage). This would curtail their activities at a stroke!
Thank you so much for this and all the time you have spent reviewing the material and sugesting a credible response. I have now responded using yours as a template. I get that if the CAA go ahead with these plans a lot of users will be either dumping their drones or flying illegally.
Thanks again!
Excellent. I think everyone should do as you say
PLUS send an email response addressing every issue in the supporting document. Use comparison with dashcam-equipped cars wherever possible:
RAISE THE FEAR that drivers will face the same bureaucratic over-reach. Why? DoT is ultimately responsible for regulating BOTH forms of transport.
GO FURTHER:
Complain to the Information Commissioner about the inferred RID proposals, so that the CAA have to answer to an external body.
Many thanks Ian for your passion and enthusiasm for explaining this ridiculously complicated consultation form. Without your help I couldn’t have filled it out. Just spent ages filling it out. Being my second attempt after inadvertently loosing a half filled out form a few days ago. As drone flyers we must respond even if there is a good chance it will be ignored. Once again many thanks.
Kudos to you for explaining it in simplified language. It seems like UK CAA is shifting more to camp USA rather than EU for drone rules .
Many thanks for highlighting this, Ian and for your superb guide pinned here.
Super useful video and I submitted my comments based on your responses and pointing out the overuse of "surface to 'x' metres" restrictions in areas that really don't warrant it which stifles property photography and photogrammetry businesses.
Thank you Ian. This is a great summary. I am very concerned about the future of drone use for hobbyists and also how the CAA is walking into creating a dystopian future where the skies are filled with surveillance drones and commercial operators only.
On the other hand, I do, therefore think there is an opportunity to start a business in autonomous drones driven by AI technology that can spot and report every criminal act including littering, spitting and gatherings of more than 2 people. Because that is what the survey will say we want......oh, and pizza!
So much work Ian, thanks for taking the time on this. Unfortunately, it feels a lot like the consultation for the ULEZ expansion. Responses won't be collated correctly and largely ignored. The way it's been written smacks of a deliberate tactic to confuse and coerce. I haven't bought a drone yet and feel that the opportunity to join the hobby and enjoy it fully will be taken away even before I do.
Phew ! I did it, completed the form...during the Italian F1 GP. Thanks for the crib sheet Ian.
Thanks Ian👍 … it’s completed and sent! But I have to say, it was more like an exam paper than a consultation, which is typical of organisations in this country. They never make things easy do they! Nevertheless I’m happy now, and I wouldn’t have felt comfortable with myself if I didn’t act. 🍻
Just submitted my response to the CAA call for input today, thanks for your help Ian.
Thank you, Ian. Your frustration echoes that of a large proportion of the drone community. Having travelled large portions of the Americas over the last 8 years (with drone(s)), it would be good if the CAA could look beyond the shores of Blighty and Europe and harvest best practices of a global drone community, but I can't help think the vagueness of the stakeholders' identities has something to do with corporate/commercial regulatory procedures...
I want to fill it in but I dont understand the questions to the degree I would feel comfortable answering the questions !!!
Many thanks Ian for your help and advice... I only fly for pleasure and not that often but will respond accordingly... S
Thanks for making this shorter version, Ian. Personally, I enjoyed your longer video and appreciate the work you put into it, but I know that some people won't even click on a video that's almost half an hour long, and so they will have missed a lot of very good info. Hopefully they will manage to watch this sub 10 min video!
Like I said in my livestream, I don't believe answering the survey will make any difference to the decisions the CAA make, but I DO admire your optimism! :)
Thanks for this but I did like ‘ranty’ Ian. Full of vim, vigour and outrage!! Shows your passion for the peeps like us. Hobbyists, who want to do the right thing by other hobbyists and the public. Good on ya!!! Keep at it both ranty and teachy
I agree Robert. The CAA will make their decision regardless of what you put down on a survey. This is a box ticking exercise to demonstrate they have gone through a consultation process. They can make all the rules in the world but the question is, who is going to comply? Who will understand the rules? Who is going to police the rules? Make the rules too draconian and folk will not even register and the CAA will lose control of the airspace.
Cheers Robert! Yeah, I think a lot of this is predetermined.... But it's like voting. Better to vote than do nothing..... 🤠👍🏻👍🏻
@@IaninLondon Voting is all rigged if you have not yet realised Ian! sadly what we thought was "Democracy" is pretty much dead.
Aye, you have a point. But I still won't be doing it. I'm sure you have to register some personal data before you can complete the survey and I'm not too happy with that. Also, if RID does come into effect here, I'm sure there will be a huge number of operators will let their registration expire and not re-register.@@IaninLondon
Thank you for all your work mate, its appreciated, especially for newer users such as myself that are not fully aware of all the intricacies involved. You explain them well and help quite a few of us digest the rather inflated information in their document. Personally I find the efforts they are going to ridiculous, especially when it comes to the sub 250g models, any idiot can pass a driving test and hurtle a 1 ton vehicle down a road at 70mph with cameras front and rear with literally no safety mechanisms, but a small piece of plastic that flies at less than 30mph and disitigrates on impact with almost anything is considered a danger.......
Thank you 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
Thank you for this Ian. Most helpful indeed. I started to complete the form 'bit-by-bit' as you were taking us through it and I was staggered by the lunacy of some of the questions and the absolutely draconian stance being taken by the CAA across the board. I banged out of completing it for the moment and will revisit it when my mind is clearer but one thing I kept saying in my responses centrered on my being a licensed, insured and responsible pilot and as you say, they have completely ignored that standpoint! Frankly??? I can see this ending up in court and a High Court Judge throwing the CAA's stance as being illegal. Let's not forget that this proposal also includes our fixed-wing RC colleagues too!!
Got a mini 3 pro recently and I'm glad I discovered your channel. Keep up the good work👍
Hi Ian, thanks for the concise and clear post. Have submitted my response to this 'Call for input' and your video provided helpful interpretation on what was quite a confusing questionnaire at times! Hopefully they'll listen to the feedback they receive.
Ian, thank you for taking the time to read the document and produce an explanatory video. Your frustrations are replicated by the majority of us, thanks to your guidance I have just completed the questionnaire on the final day! keep up the great work - love your videos !
Glad I saw this Ian, thanks. I've submitted my response. Now we will have to wait and see if they even listen. Not holding my breath mate 🙂
Thank you Ian great shorter version. CAA are unbelievable making our lives so hard. What ever we say they will still do what they want 😖😖
Your opening line made my literally LOL 🙂
Very many thanks for the video and easy to digest responses. Much appreciated!
It's time we brought the fight to the reguators. Instead of waiting for them to produce luidcrous proposals for over-regulation *we* , the community, need to work out our own regulatory framework and present it to the regulators for implementation. *WE* are the experts and we are the ones who they must seek compliance from. Let them know that we *are* safety-focused but that we have the knowledge, skill and experience to come up with *effective* , realistic and practical regulation that *will* produce much higher levels fo compliance and safety.
Just because letting the regulator make the rules is the way it's been done in the past doesn't mean that has to also be the future. Time to improve the system to the benefit of all stake-holders. The ball is in our court.
Are you having a laugh. The Civil Aviation Authority will do as it sees fit and butting heads with them is not a good idea. Take a look at what the TCAA in Canada have done to drone regulations. No, the only way to make any headway is to draft a letter that can be sent individually or by representative UAV bodies to MPs to try and get a two way dialogue started. I have recently come from Ireland, where my licence and registration allowed me to fly in twenty seven other EU countries. Now I have to start all over again. I was employed by the IAA, Irish Aviation Authority for fourty years. I was interacting with the CAA, Eurocontrol, TCAA and other bodies. Within all these bodies there are individuals who absolutely hate the Drone/UAV community and some of them are in positions to cripple our hobby. Let's all be careful.
That was an afternoon I won't get back, well worth it unless it turns out to be a 'consulstatement'. Appreciate your guidance and views. Regarding 'Auditors' I heard the advice if you encounter one ensure you are playing music on your phone whilst they are recording then they'll get taken down for copyright.
Thank you for doing this, you are a life saver...
Done.
Answered in my own words.
Thanks for posting your video.
Thank you Ian for your hard work in putting this together. Wow. What a minefield!! I would have really struggled with this without your help. 💪
I've filled it in and responded. The lack of evidence based decision making really is off putting in this country now.
I emailed my views to the CAA’s normal contact email address, as I couldn’t find the questionnaire on their site, then I found it linked to a youtubers channel, but I didn’t see guidance notes so didn’t know about them. I Filled it in as best as I could, and Imput a lot of extra notes in the boxes , clarifying my views. I saw their email address on geeksvana for contacting them about questionnaire, so I re-emailed them a couple of days ago with the ID number of it and my original email stating my views. I don’t believe our views matter in a dictatorship like the uk ( who gets the choice of what decisions the local council or government take, they are only representing our views, at election time , a true democracy would let people vote on all important and major issues ).
Thank you for your guidance, without this I would not have responded as the process seemed beyond me which I guess is what they wanted. Keep flying 🙂
Thanks for your excellent and informative explanation of the CAA survey Ian. Keep up the good work.
Spot on Ian, thanks for all your efforts
Thanks for the potted guide Ian... I fear that I just wont have the time to do this survey and I fear that I might not be alone. Apart from the fatalist in me that says you can't fight the system, I must accept that we will live in a 24 by 7 surveillance state with very few freedoms (aka Russia, NK, China, Iran etc...) regardless of how much we protest. I also feel that 99% of drone owners who fly occasionally for hobby or fun with the kids, in school holidays or weekends, just wont know that this survey exists and wont understand the ramifications. The first they might know about it is when they get a fine in the near future. Half the drone owners in the UK don't know that they even have to register or do the DMARES. The other half who have complied think they are sorted, know the rules, are cautions risk averse flyers and respect the rights of others is shared spaces. They just wont know the rules have changed when they do such is the poor quality of publicity. Even when they do change the rules and publish them, the majority of casual flyers with just say "WTF !!!???", too late to do anything about it. I am going to try my best to fil in the online questions but I fear I will be one of the less that 1% that do. If true, then that sample size will be statistically meaningless.
You've saved me a lot of time with that document. Thank you👍
Your 30 minute video was helpful, but this is much better! :D
Thanks for a brief and precise summary, very useful.
Thanks for the heads up and done 👍
So I'm two hours into filling out a form I never intended to complete, because you told me it would take five minutes. You have never lied to me before Ian. I hope this is worth it. On a serious note you've actually got me telling them what I think - so well done mate. I'm going to have break at Q17 and come back later (I promise).
Well, you can't save at Q17 because it won't let you (CAA IT wizards) - so I've done it - all 19 questions. Ta
In fairness, you could have just hit the replies without typing extra words, and I think it would have taken you around 5 minutes. But I'm glad you are adding more to it 🤠👍🏻👍🏻
Thanks Ian I needed help to respond to this was realty confused by the questionnaire .
Thanks Ian, form submitted.
Completed & Submitted
Done. Great work Ian.
just sent in my form,cheers for the help ian
Excellent video thanks....well explained !!
Spot on video ❤ the more people who respond the better.
Submitted...Thanks Ian for the guidence and thanks Chat GPT for rewritting the answers...lol
I really can’t understand where the CAA is coming from. The survey is diabolical. Come on CAA geo-fencing is the way forward to help protect sensitive places. The way to go is to keep it simple. Well done Ian for another informative video. 😊
You have communicated in a few words exactly the way forward, inflated documents and ridiculous wording is designed purely to make something simple seem difficult and complex, therefore putting people off engaging and making it seem like "more regulation" is the only way.
Fabulous video. Thank you.
Ian you are a legend. Or should I say Legionair.
Well done Ian👍👏
Thank you, Ian by taking time out on convoluted questionnaire and document. As this would have put people off responding to it.
All filled in and sent off. I also plan to send a frankly furious email.
Thankyou 👍
Thanks Ian
Excellent again
Good job Ian
Would setting up an petition for people to sign help at all?
You are the only reason I'm aware of the questionnaire, even though I am registered etc. (Filled out with your help btw )
If you were to set one up I'm sure people would be more than happy to sign one.
Food for thought.
Keep up the good fight 👍🏻
As a newbie to all this of just a few days, I had no idea and listened to all 29m of your last post, whilst adding my tuppence to the survey, before submitting. It is important people understand, so personally I think the content and length of the last vid was correct.
Thank you 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@@IaninLondon I'm going to be honest there is a lot more to this than changes by the CAA, but it isn't a discussion for your channel.
@@siukcnc Oh I know the DfT and other security agencies are going to be working on this. It's a foregone conclusion remote ID will be introduced...... 😐
@@IaninLondon Sadly it's even darker than this. The fact that it is being rolled out all across the globe shows it. Fortunately with every action 'they' take, more and more people are waking up.
Thanks pal!
Thank you! 🤠👍🏻👍🏻
Good update video Ian
Thanks Lyn 👍
I attempted to fill it out a few weeks ago, sadly gave up with it as the questions are stupid by design and draconian, i might have another go with your suggestions, though i think they will still go ahead with new rules and laws regardless of what we say, all to suit their NEW STAKEHOLDERS "Amazon-Google etc" who want our airspace for their business.
Hi Ian, thanks for the simple explanation of your opinion on the questionnaire. Do you think that the CAA are actually going to listen, or are they they just going through the motions to soften the blow when all this is implemented?
👍🏼👍🏼👍🏼
Ian,,, they won't make it easier to fly, but they will make it easier for the Government to make a bundle in fines.
Thanks for the guidance Ian which I have followed, I did attempt to complete the form the other night but had to give it up as a bad job because I really couldn't understand most of it but you explained it well so now Job done. Cheers.
Well Ian, I have always and will always continue to value your thoughts, insights, knowledge and experience concerning everything with drones. Especially control, safety and various conditions. In your previous video, you really showed a vigorous passion 😄which in my view is great to see and thank you for that. I reckon you should be a Drone Tsar for the Government and it's agencies, including CAA.
For the normal sub 250g classification Ian, why don't we all have a one-off competency safety and flight test exam, to demonstrate the pilot is safe and competent. This could then be used as an exemption, as you have proven you're safe and thoughtful to others. Would this be doable you think or not?? I would take this if i felt it would help the Sub 250g brigade of Drone pilots out there. Thanks as always Ian, take care pal.
I like the idea of being a Tzar 😎😎😎
@@IaninLondon Give it some serious thought Ian, you could do this individually or hook up with other advanced drone pilots to make your case - a visit to Downing Street to meet the PM - why not eh?
Yeah, I never got the memo from the CAA, but one thing they did remind me of is my renewal cost of 11 quid 🤬 which has gone up from 9 quid originally 😂
Did it and just answered agree or disagree on all questions and in a couple of boxes said I was a good pilot and stook to rules... It got submitted so if I did wrong will find out soon.
Thanks, I will try, but to be honest, as an amateur photographer and a person of nervous disposition, I think the anxiety of flying a drone (legal/not legal, safe/not safe, avoid people, don't go over 400ft, crash into trees, fly off on its own, ditch in water, being chased by a local council official, being attacked by strangers, .... imagine Mr Bean and a drone) no longer justifies the expense of money, time and worry. If I had wanted all this I would have trained to become a commercial jumbo jet pilot, not the flyer of a sub 250 gram drone/toy. The CAA and government needs to "get a grip".
It's the stakeholders that got me and the lack of clarity. I watched that sky coppers program, and whilst I understand the need and usefulness, I didn't see one thing about the way they flew with regards GVC qualifications! This consultation is only about keeping the skies clear so the other stakeholders don't have too actually follow the rules themselves!🤬
Done Ian
Hey Ian first like to say thank you for all your videos. I live here in the USA and here Remote ID goes into effect this September. Do you know if the FAA is doing the same thing they're trying to do with the CAA. like the remote ID they put into effect here do you think the rules are the same to where it's meant to catch everyday flyers and little screw ups and fine them us? Because when I first heard about it I thought the same thing you said "nobody doing anything illegal going to comply with Remote ID.". Also as far as I know the FAA never gave us any chance the survey or anything like that. If they had my opinions would have been very aligned with yours on this on all of it. In US it was basically like, "remote ID is going into effect Sep 2023 it's like a license plate for your car you need it".
Just completed this Ian, and must admit this questionnaire is not meant for Joe public, I have been flying in open category for approximately three years with the mini 2 and actually had no issues, the CAA just need simply the rules and make documentation clearer. We can then all get on with enjoy flying un hindered.
“All hail Macbeth,” the author of this survey. You are Macduff, Ian. Your sword will win the day.
It’s scary that this will likely be adopted in Australia
Hi Ian, once again thanks for sticking up for us drone users. I can’t seem to find the correct survey. Do you have a direct link? Cheers
In the video description
Maybe we should preempt and start a petition to instate the C labelling
The email address starts with uas not vas
Good grief. I tried to complete the form but got very confused... took an hour to get half way through...tried to save to come back later but it wouldn't let me, demanded that I complete the questions !!!!
A lot of people seem confused about "...where the CAA are coming from..." with this: I'll bet you a dollar that the whole idea is to make the flying of recreational drones (regardless of weight or "class") as close to impossible as they can. Why? because there is more money to be made issuing yearly licenses and airworthiness certificates to "stakeholders" who want to use the sub-400' airspace for deliveries and the only way that big commerce is going to be able to use the sub-400' airspace is if all the inconvenient, uncontrollable little drones we all love to use get grounded.
I did pick up on your RID worry about the remote issuing of fines for "regulation breaches" (VLOS/AGL etc.) as a result of third party data-mining, what is probably more of a concern is whether they'll follow the national trend for criminalizing currently legitimate behaviour as "historic offences". What a money-spinner THAT would be for the CAA.
Basically mate, I think we are all fiddling while Rome burns. All the "stakeholders" have powerful and slick lobbyists who sit on the panels present in these meetings which decide drone policy, where is the lobby representing all the thousands of mugs who fork out £800+ to DJI, Autel, etc? does any "hobbyist" actually have a voice that will be listened to? No... because we don't work as a team.
It’s interesting that the CASA here are working with Drone Operators in Australia to try and make it simpler and clearer.
We are also mounting a case here for VFR (Night) drone flight.
The main thing we’re facing is the recent incidents around controller airspace violations - which makes sense; and What is and is not restricted.
Geofencing already exists around specific Government Buildings, Military Areas, RAAF bases and Gaols here. It’s mainly getting clarity on where indigenous people don’t really want us to fly here (or at least without permission)
I hope the CAA over there see some common sense, and that CASA don’t follow their lead…
Stay Safe, and fly responsibly.
I fly the mini 3 pro and bigger classic...i fly over the sea often and go beyond VLOS but what fish will be harmed..i fly over ships when crew are feet dry....if RID arrives i'm out.
I am sure somene will produce a hack to disable or remove any softwere RID 😉
I am really trying to get this survey done. They really do not want normal people to fill it in. my brain hurts.
The thing that concerns me about RID, if the CAA follows the FAA, is that non-compliant (legacy) drones which can’t broadcast a RID will require Remote ID Broadcast Module to be ‘installed’. This would surely mean that many sub-250g drones will suddenly move into the 250g-4kg class with all of the implications.
Questionaire tells you allot about their intelligence level.
Thanks Ian. What I still can’t get my head round is Why we don’t follow EASA ‘s Rules, Regs and Guidelines. How can the UK’s needs differ so much. I suppose the positive is it’s keeping lots of people in work. Possible to many contributing to the questioner hence yet another disjointed publication from them.
"Why we don’t follow EASA ‘s Rules" - Becuz.. like.. Brexit innit.. huh huh huh
@@danmcadie2515 Thanks for pointing out the obvious but it still doesn’t negate us from following their lead. We just need the EASA certification if we want to fly in EU countries such as Iceland.
@@thevideoark Your not getting it. When the pork voted us out of the EU, any chance of a reasonable and sensible idea like being completely inline with the EU's drone rules went out the window. The pork will not entertain anything that makes us look like we are being governed or controlled or following any rules or regulations from the EU.
I spent an hour filling out the form including making comments. I think I inadvertently clicked the back button. Lost the bloody lot. If I don’t make comments will my response be ignored?
Fine me for historical flights and i will fine the CAA for all this current mess with ATC.
Im not the best writer is there a good cut and paste for the end bit ?
Pinned comment 😉
Once this becomes about legal penalty it should come under scrutiny for compliance with common law principles. Common law is about law being developed based on evidence of risk not speculation. You are unlikely to find any law that doesn't comply with this - the worst case is the risk is manufactured evidence but not speculative. There is critical rationale for this being a requirement and it is a fundamental in its logic as either being supportive of the freedom of citizens or prohibitive without reason. In other words it protects against the wielding of coercive force against citizens - the type that is wielded in non-democratic countries.
What's happening is so fundamentally wrong it should be dismissed as unlawful without further debate. If you applied the same approach to driving, education, freedom of movement, gender equality, or wider equality of treatment it would be clearly morally wrong - how the CAA can arbitrarily decide on hypothetical risk and then progress this into law raises serious questions about what oversight exists between governing bodies and the legal system.
With the Nats bank holiday computer meltdown following the NHS Track and Trace fiasco and the appalling Royal Mail computer failure the prospect of the CAA creating a system to track every drone so that they can generate income from penalising everyday fliers has massive potential for unfairness and failure written all over it. No doubt they will take the same course as “safety cameras” and scare anyone presented with a fine into not risking challenging it in case faced with a significantly greater cost too.
Let's not forget the Met Police and PSNY data breaches. A lot of military and police drone pilots could have secret deployments and domiciles revealed by pattern-of-life data from their personal drones in the same way as STRAVA did it with fitbits, compromising national security. Source: Bellingcat.
It's purely a box ticking exercise to say they consulted people. The questionnaire is purposefully confusing, vague and unhelpful so they can present the results in the way they need them to, to push their plans forward. Since when has privacy been a remit of the CAA?
2026 the Mavic 5 should have been launched by then
I going to fill this things out again but with a diffent email, I just do not know how to answer coming from a FPV user apart from we cannot follow all the caa BS rules and they should justify rules vs risk, I messed the C1 and C3 what a load of BS they should really leave sub250 alone aslong as they are flying below 120m and not in unflying airspace, vlos and the spotter need to go if can be done safe without
I would think by 2030 the only way you'll be flying a uav in the uk will be if your in the military, what the government wants the government gets watch this space