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

St Catherine's Chapel Abbotsbury

I saw this on their web page:
"English Heritage does not permit drone flying from or over sites in our care, except by contractors or partners undertaking flights for a specific purpose, who satisfy stringent CAA criteria, have the correct insurances and permissions, and are operating under controlled conditions."

Did you go for permission or forgiveness? :)
 
I saw this on their web page:
"English Heritage does not permit drone flying from or over sites in our care, except by contractors or partners undertaking flights for a specific purpose, who satisfy stringent CAA criteria, have the correct insurances and permissions, and are operating under controlled conditions."

Did you go for permission or forgiveness? :)
English Heritage can prevent people from taking-off from the land it is responsible for, but their claim to prevent flights over their properties, despite whatever they want to say, is not valid. It still remains law in the U.K. that overflying private land (unless that land is designated as a no go area E.G. a prison, say), is legal so long as the operator takes off from outside that property, and observes the usual restrictions regarding separation from people, buildings and such like.

It follows, then that if @thetrecker took off from outside of their property, he was doing nothing wrong and didn't need any permission from English Heritage.

Edit to say that there may be issues with regard to the data protection act if identifiable images of individuals are captured but that is a different matter and, as you know, easily identifiable images of people is unlikely with the CGO3+ if the 50mtrs rule is followed.
 
Last edited:
English Heritage can prevent people from taking-off from the land it is responsible for, but their claim to prevent flights over their properties, despite whatever they want to say, is not valid. It still remains law in the U.K. that overflying private land (unless that land is designated as a no go area E.G. a prison, say), is legal so long as the operator takes off from outside that property, and observes the usual restrictions regarding separation from people, buildings and such like.

It follows, then that if @thetrecker took off from outside of their property, he was doing nothing wrong and didn't need any permission from English Heritage.

Edit to say that there may be issues with regard to the data protection act if identifiable images of individuals are captured but that is a different matter and, as you know, easily identifiable images of people is unlikely with the CGO3+ if the 50mtrs rule is followed.
@Sureshot flush just gave same answered that I would have
Regarding data protection I would
throw most of that out the window as you can take photos/video of anybody in a public place
 
@Sureshot flush just gave same answered that I would have
Regarding data protection I would
throw most of that out the window as you can take photos/video of anybody in a public place
Yes, but flying over private land is exactly that...private land, so data protection would need to be considered.
 
Y'all fly safe & don't get caught...
Nothing to get caught for. As I stated above, @thetrecker was well within his legal right to fly over that property so long as his take-off point was outside of English Heritage's control. I would have had no qualms about flying that site and have indeed done so over similar sites to the one shown in his video.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thetrecker
Yes, but flying over private land is exactly that...private land, so data protection would need to be considered.
i Hear you flush its an interesting one and needs testing in a court of law as quote
"A public place is generally an indoor or outdoor area, whether privately or publicly owned, to which the public have access by right or by invitation, expressed or implied, whether by payment of money or not, but not a place when used exclusively by one or more individuals for a private gathering or other personal purpose"

if I am on a public street I can take a photo of your house even in the window walk down the road with my camera on my phone on record even in a pub witch is private land but open to the public i can give so many more examples. The data protection would also have to cover all of those mobile phones cameras etc for that to be able to actually work in a court of law

we should start a topic on this lol
i have also followed a case that went to court regarding taking photos in a public place the photographer won and it throws the whole data protection argument out the window

@Sureshot to late the evidence is on youtube. It's a shame that we have so many places in the UK that are owned by ether English heritage or National Trust that have a blanket ban for flying drones even though you can fly at maybe 50% of there places, safely and within the law as regards to public. The one lady in the shot we spoke to before flying as regarding other people walking into the flying area still trying to work out how that works but was still 150 feet away outside the bubble my biggest concern was the sheep if i freaked them out i would have stopped the flight
 
i Hear you flush its an interesting one and needs testing in a court of law as quote
"A public place is generally an indoor or outdoor area, whether privately or publicly owned, to which the public have access by right or by invitation, expressed or implied, whether by payment of money or not, but not a place when used exclusively by one or more individuals for a private gathering or other personal purpose"

if I am on a public street I can take a photo of your house even in the window walk down the road with my camera on my phone on record even in a pub witch is private land but open to the public i can give so many more examples. The data protection would also have to cover all of those mobile phones cameras etc for that to be able to actually work in a court of law

we should start a topic on this lol
i have also followed a case that went to court regarding taking photos in a public place the photographer won and it throws the whole data protection argument out the window

@Sureshot to late the evidence is on youtube. It's a shame that we have so many places in the UK that are owned by ether English heritage or National Trust that have a blanket ban for flying drones even though you can fly at maybe 50% of there places, safely and within the law as regards to public. The one lady in the shot we spoke to before flying as regarding other people walking into the flying area still trying to work out how that works but was still 150 feet away outside the bubble my biggest concern was the sheep if i freaked them out i would have stopped the flight
I hear you too @thetrecker . Regarding drones carrying cameras similar to the CGO3+ the point is a mute one anyway so long as you adhere to the 50mtrs rule regarding people not under your control. BTW, thanks for clarifying what a public place is. You learn something new every day. I alsways saw a public place as the street outside, or a park, say. Not as a place where you had to pay for entry.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thetrecker
Great video. Looks like there is an underground structure as well. In ireland we are not permitted to fly near national monuments and or archeological sites. ? and if it's one thing Ireland is not short of is archeology.
 
Great video. Looks like there is an underground structure as well. In ireland we are not permitted to fly near national monuments and or archeological sites. ? and if it's one thing Ireland is not short of is archeology.
I'm not familiar with Irish (Southern) laws regarding UAS flights, although I would have imagined them to be not so dissimilar to the law pertaining to the U.K...seems they are not similar in certain respects.

As alluded to above, here in the U.K. there is no restriction on flying over archaeological sites or monuments though we have to be careful not to trespass or take off from within some of those sites without permission...the air is free to use over those sites so long as it isn't a no-go area (power stations or airports, say) and as long as we respect the 50mtr rules regarding things not under our control.

I know that Ireland is bursting with archaeology. Plenty of fantastic sites to fly...but you can't. It must be frustrating for you. Some years ago (2015) I was doing a commercial job for an environment action group not too far from where I live. It was a survey of of an area with a view to putting a plan together for a major tree planting. During that flight I stumbled on an ancient archaeological feature that was previously unknown. A real coup for me and the action group was thrilled. Manchester University were informed. They have yet to excavate it because of a lack of funding so are still keeping the discovery secret until they can get funding to work on it. Obviously the trees they were planning to plant on that spot have been put on hold (though trees have been planted nearby).

The discovery flight was made by a P2V (not my TH) so I can't show any pictures of it here...but then, since it's supposed to still be a secret I probably wouldn't show pictures here even if it was a TH that discovered it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MartinC
I'm not familiar with Irish (Southern) laws regarding UAS flights, although I would have imagined them to be not so dissimilar to the law pertaining to the U.K...seems they are not similar in certain respects.

As alluded to above, here in the U.K. there is no restriction on flying over archaeological sites or monuments though we have to be careful not to trespass or take off from within some of those sites without permission...the air is free to use over those sites so long as it isn't a no-go area (power stations or airports, say) and as long as we respect the 50mtr rules regarding things not under our control.

I know that Ireland is bursting with archaeology. Plenty of fantastic sites to fly...but you can't. It must be frustrating for you. Some years ago (2015) I was doing a commercial job for an environment action group not too far from where I live. It was a survey of of an area with a view to putting a plan together for a major tree planting. During that flight I stumbled on an ancient archaeological feature that was previously unknown. A real coup for me and the action group was thrilled. Manchester University were informed. They have yet to excavate it because of a lack of funding so are still keeping the discovery secret until they can get funding to work on it. Obviously the trees they were planning to plant on that spot have been put on hold (though trees have been planted nearby).

The discovery flight was made by a P2V (not my TH) so I can't show any pictures of it here...but then, since it's supposed to still be a secret I probably wouldn't show pictures here even if it was a TH that discovered it.
That must have been a huge thrill for you.

I think what happened here in relation to the sites was that someone either hit one of buildings or buzzed a visitor. Typical. Takes one idiot to ruin it for everyone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FlushVision
That must have been a huge thrill for you.

I think what happened here in relation to the sites was that someone either hit one of buildings or buzzed a visitor. Typical. Takes one idiot to ruin it for everyone.
It only takes one.

That archaeological feature I mentioned above is currently masked by strategically placed undergrowth to try and prevent it being seen and vandalized, not that it can be easily seen from the ground, if at all...after all, it has gone undetected for centuries until I threw a drone up over it. If I hadn't have been allowed to fly at that place (and probably wouldn't have flown it if I hadn't been asked to) it is likely that it would still be unknown to the archaeologists.
 
Great video. Looks like there is an underground structure as well. In ireland we are not permitted to fly near national monuments and or archeological sites. ? and if it's one thing Ireland is not short of is archeology.
that must be very frustrating
 
i Hear you flush its an interesting one and needs testing in a court of law as quote
"A public place is generally an indoor or outdoor area, whether privately or publicly owned, to which the public have access by right or by invitation, expressed or implied, whether by payment of money or not, but not a place when used exclusively by one or more individuals for a private gathering or other personal purpose"

if I am on a public street I can take a photo of your house even in the window walk down the road with my camera on my phone on record even in a pub witch is private land but open to the public i can give so many more examples. The data protection would also have to cover all of those mobile phones cameras etc for that to be able to actually work in a court of law

we should start a topic on this lol
i have also followed a case that went to court regarding taking photos in a public place the photographer won and it throws the whole data protection argument out the window

@Sureshot to late the evidence is on youtube. It's a shame that we have so many places in the UK that are owned by ether English heritage or National Trust that have a blanket ban for flying drones even though you can fly at maybe 50% of there places, safely and within the law as regards to public. The one lady in the shot we spoke to before flying as regarding other people walking into the flying area still trying to work out how that works but was still 150 feet away outside the bubble my biggest concern was the sheep if i freaked them out i would have stopped the flight
Isn't that the US definition? The UK one slightly differs? " At the Material time" Could that be be construed as opening hours? If you fly over an area which is closed to the public at a certain hour? Like you say it would be up to a Judge in the end.
 
Isn't that the US definition? The UK one slightly differs? " At the Material time" Could that be be construed as opening hours? If you fly over an area which is closed to the public at a certain hour? Like you say it would be up to a Judge in the end.
Makes sense that. If a 'walled garden', say, has opening times between 0900 and 1700 hrs then that place is a public place because members of the public are allowed access between those times even though they may have to pay to visit it.. During closed times the public doesn't have access so I suppose that during those times the walled garden becomes private property. This, of course, doesn't take away a pilot's ability to fly over that garden so long as he took off from outside of the walls and maintains the usual separation distances from things not under the pilot's control.
 
Makes sense that. If a 'walled garden', say, has opening times between 0900 and 1700 hrs then that place is a public place because members of the public are allowed access between those times even though they may have to pay to visit it.. During closed times the public doesn't have access so I suppose that during those times the walled garden becomes private property. This, of course, doesn't take away a pilot's ability to fly over that garden so long as he took off from outside of the walls and maintains the usual separation distances from things not under the pilot's control.
@Mrgs1 yes it was the US version but they are generally the same as flush said about the flying over saved me typing it lol but my point on bringing up the public place is with data protection regarding cameras due to the fact that you can take pictures of anybody in a public place without permission and broadcast that picture

yep we should start a thread on this topic
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
20,954
Messages
241,584
Members
27,284
Latest member
csandoval