Hello Fellow Yuneec Pilot!
Join our free Yuneec community and remove this annoying banner!
Sign up

New UK Laws for Drone users

So new laws kicking in end of this month are: still not above 400 ft, and still not by airports.
Looks like we don't have to register or test or anything until late 2019...
Thanks for the info.
 
So new laws kicking in end of this month are: still not above 400 ft, and still not by airports.
Looks like we don't have to register or test or anything until late 2019...
Thanks for the info.
Registration from November 2019 I believe.

Myself, and I'm sure all other PfCO holders in the U.K., received an email from the CAA this last day or so (for me it was this morning) to tell us that renewals for PfCO received by them after the end of this month should be accompanied by an amended Operations Manual that reflect the amendments to the ANO 2018 and the email also stated that further amendments will be forthcoming.
 
So new laws kicking in end of this month are: still not above 400 ft, and still not by airports.
Looks like we don't have to register or test or anything until late 2019...
Thanks for the info.
It's a bit more than that if you are PfCO anyway, there are now only 2 weight classes, 0-20kg multirotor and 0-20kg fixed wing
The standard permission now also permits operations in congested areas down to 50m for all UAS 20Kg or less.
Flights at night will be automatically granted provided a procedure for this has been established in the OPS Manual. Procedures covering night operations must also be incorporated into your Ops Manual for renewal applications.
 
Looks like the same kind of BIG business doing a takeover of airspace, pushing out the hobbyist and small commercial operators. Note the BIG money mentioned for the UK in their restructuring the use of drones.
 
Nothing new really, all the papers and BBC just keep regurgitating what was already proposed.
 
Most people thought the original 1 km exclusion zones around airports were not enough, so I think it was pretty inevitable that they would be increased eventually, Gatwick incident or not. And registration has been on the cards for a long time now, so no major surprises there either, although of course it should be painfully obvious to anyone that neither registration or vastly increased NFZs around airports would have stopped this sort of thing from happening, if it ever did in the first place !
 
Most people thought the original 1 km exclusion zones around airports were not enough, so I think it was pretty inevitable that they would be increased eventually, Gatwick incident or not. And registration has been on the cards for a long time now, so no major surprises there either, although of course it should be painfully obvious to anyone that neither registration or vastly increased NFZs around airports would have stopped this sort of thing from happening, if it ever did in the first place !
Most people thought the original 1 km exclusion zones around airports were not enough, so I think it was pretty inevitable that they would be increased eventually, Gatwick incident or not. And registration has been on the cards for a long time now, so no major surprises there either, although of course it should be painfully obvious to anyone that neither registration or vastly increased NFZs around airports would have stopped this sort of thing from happening, if it ever did in the first place !
Registration is like a car number plate, open to abuse, there is talk you register the person instead, it's all a grey area, which will be hard to implement. The drones measures around Airports is essential but common sense needs to be applied.
 
Do you guys still have to pay to watch "free to air" television???
Hmmmmm!!!!??
Anyways, May's got to pay the ripoff Brexit fees somehow.
 
Do you guys still have to pay to watch "free to air" television???
Yes, we have to buy a £150 TV license, but a long time ago I decided that was terrible value for money, so stopped paying it and went to Netflix instead, where most of the BBC content I want to watch is there anyway...
 
Yes, we have to buy a £150 TV license, but a long time ago I decided that was terrible value for money, so stopped paying it and went to Netflix instead, where most of the BBC content I want to watch is there anyway...

You have to buy a license to operate a TV receiver in the UK to pick up a signal transmitted to free air? Is that paid on each TV at time of purchase?

The three broadcast companies in the US have nothing but trash programming and cable TV pricing is outrageous. Both are based in supporting the Pro Sports teams, which I have quit supporting. The players salaries are astronomical, the owners are rolling in the money, and you blow a week’s pay to take the family to a live game. If they relied on me for an income they would be Greeters at Walmart or flipping burgers at McDonald’s or Burger King. On par with the actual education they received while on a free ride to a major university.

Now all I do is stream from Netflix, YouTube, and the content my son shares from his iTunes purchases. Broadband costs enough as it is.
 
You have to buy a license to operate a TV receiver in the UK to pick up a signal transmitted to free air?
Yes, because of the BBC, whose programming doesn't contain adverts, so they are largely funded by TV licensing.

Is that paid on each TV at time of purchase?
No, it's paid every year direct to the BBC, and doesn't matter how many sets you have, it's just the one fee... oh, and I think you get a miniscule discount if you are still watching in black and white (!) or if you are very old.
 
So the signal must be encrypted and you need a converter to decode the transmission. Of course true commercial free programming might not be so bad. No 35th best sale of the year, cheesy used car ads, erectile dysfunction, or feminine hygiene commercials. We still have to put up with that garbage with paid cable TV.
 
Most people thought the original 1 km exclusion zones around airports were not enough, so I think it was pretty inevitable that they would be increased eventually, Gatwick incident or not. And registration has been on the cards for a long time now, so no major surprises there either, although of course it should be painfully obvious to anyone that neither registration or vastly increased NFZs around airports would have stopped this sort of thing from happening, if it ever did in the first place !
Agreed - but the intention to extend the NFZ 4.6km radius plus runway extensions to small rural airfields seems like an overreaction.

Of course I would say that because the new NFZ when applied to my local White Waltham airfield will place my back yard inside the NFZ so I will no longer be able to fly since my age and infirmities limit my ability to travel.
DFT new NFZ map.png

The Government's full drone response is worth reading because it is not all bad for recreational pilots. Police powers have been reined in, for example, and proposed penalties for offenders have been reduced.

But they confirm that built-in NFZs are coming, which has been obvious for a while.
DFT geofencing.png
And the previously tabled compulsory drone registration and online competency test will come into force at the end of November.

These are a slight inconvenience but much less damaging to the industry than enforcing expensive live flying training and tests.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AeroJ
Agreed - but the intention to extend the NFZ 4.6km radius plus runway extensions to small rural airfields seems like an overreaction.

Of course I would say that because the new NFZ when applied to my local White Waltham airfield will place my back yard inside the NFZ so I will no longer be able to fly since my age and infirmities limit my ability to travel.
View attachment 13586

The Government's full drone response is worth reading because it is not all bad for recreational pilots. Police powers have been reined in, for example, and proposed penalties for offenders have been reduced.

But they confirm that built-in NFZs are coming, which has been obvious for a while.
View attachment 13587
And the previously tabled compulsory drone registration and online competency test will come into force at the end of November.

These are a slight inconvenience but much less damaging to the industry than enforcing expensive live flying training and tests.
If the airfield near you is anything like most of the rural airstrips in the US you would be rare to see an aircraft even takeoff or land at it. Most only have small aircraft that utilize them and a 1.6km radius would be more than adequate for separation purposes. If the General Aviation pilot has to make an approach any longer than that their license should be revoked ( with emergency conditions being an exception).
 
Rather busy then. Have you ever had problems with the old distances? Most light aircraft are less than a half mile from the runway when they turn for final on approach, at the present 1.6 km that leaves a 0.8 km buffer. The type of airport should determine the separation distance. Major airports need more room, but small ones for light aircraft don’t need nearly as much room.
 

New Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
20,952
Messages
241,578
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval