Drones are ideal lookouts for burglars, train robbers and poachers .. new report

[bunyarra]

<sigh>

No mention of the regulated commercial side or of the fact the model aircraft and copters have been around for decades with cameras. Sure, it';s easier to fly a Quad but we also seem to be much softer targets for distrust.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-29717771

[kilby]

Probably would if they where not so obvious, didn';t have limited flight times, didn';t make so much noise and where any use for the task.

Cars should also be banned as people could sit in them and watch

[tupoar]

Might as well ban mobile phones with camera';s as well then. While we';re there, ban breathing too.

[kilby]

Might as well ban mobile phones with camera';s as well then. While we';re there, ban breathing too.

And shoes, everybody knows that criminals wear shoes

[SeamusOD]

What about guns you can kill people with them too

[tupoar]

What about guns you can kill people with them too

Naa, guns are fine, it';s the shoes that are used to transport the guns that are the problem.

[kilby]

Naa, guns are fine, it';s the shoes that are used to transport the guns that are the problem.

Nappies too because some people who wore nappies as babies grow up and become criminals, there a gateway item

[Hands0n]

This is the typical and nowadays very usual media frenzy to make a story out of anything they possibly can. 

While they';re all running around like Chicken Little, back at The Ministry more sane individuals are pulling together legal frameworks to facilitate "drone" use in EU air space, and that includes the UK.  There are simply billions of £s resting on getting it right, so a lot of industry interest also.

[turok007]

this news story is nothing.  just wait until someone does a report of the YT videos.   it wouldn';t take to long to edit a video together of the crazy stuff going on.   also im waiting to see if all the people boasting about how far they have flown FPV  get a fine or something.

[doofer]

You could pick-pocket loads of people who are all looking up at the sky wondering what that infernal strimmer-like noise was and what those flashy LED lights were on...

[nbpicklesno2]

This sensationalist nonsense was written by a former head of GCHQ!!!!

It makes me wonder what kind of intelligence analysis they are producing there.

[doofer]

This sensationalist nonsense was written by a former head of GCHQ!!!!

He';s concerned about privacy? The only concern he';ll have about privacy is the public having any privacy at all.

[rockliffe]

Wow, as a newbie to the forum, I';m amazed there are so many who come across as being blind to the possible negative aspects that UAVs can be used for. Surely you don';t have to be a rocket scientist to see the potential for using them in a negative manner, or for terrorist use. I';m amazed the UK government have allowed such freedom for the public to acquire drones with literally zero regulation, unlike some other countries who CAN see the darker side of drones and who have a zero tolerance.

I have come into the drone world to use mine for commercial purposes and am going through the correct training and channels to acquire my RPQ. But for hundreds of other users who are not using them for commercial purposes, they are exempt from any formal training or registration, not to mention insurance. And what have I seen since ';getting into'; the drone world? I';ve seen some idiots flying drones for miles from their TO point, I';ve seen idiots flying them through cloud, above cloud and in limited visibility scenarios. I';ve seen drones being flown within yards of people and buildings in public places, in fact all the regulations which commercial operators have to abide by. The latest, as we have all seen plastered throughout the media, the drone flown into a football stadium!  Is it really so difficult to understand why the UK government and security agencies are now taking a closer look.

Hey fellas, don';t gang up on me, I know my opinion is likely to be counter to the rest of this thread, but some need to wake up and see the other side of the argument instead of being so protective and subjective with their viewpoint.

[nbpicklesno2]

Would I be wrong to assume that you are a tad resentful at having to pay your £1600+ to be ';qualified'; when you see others paying nothing to do essentially the same thing?

[Friskle]

Wow, as a newbie to the forum, I';m amazed there are so many who are blind to the possible negative aspects that UAVs can be used for. Surely you don';t have to be a rocket scientist to see the potential for using them in a negative manner, or for terrorist use. I';m amazed the UK government have allowed such freedom for the public to acquire drones with literally zero regulation, unlike some other countries who CAN see the darker side of drones and who have a zero tolerance.

I have come into the drone world to use mine for commercial purposes and am going through the correct training and channels to acquire my RPQ. But for hundreds of other users who are not using them for commercial purposes, they are exempt from any formal training or registration, not to mention insurance. And what have I seen since ';getting into'; the drone world? I';ve seen some idiots flying drones for miles from their TO point, I';ve seen idiots flying them through cloud, above cloud and in limited visibility scenarios. I';ve seen drones being flown within yards of people and buildings in public places, in fact all the regulations which commercial operators have to abide by. The latest, as we have all seen plastered throughout the media, the drone flown into a football stadium!  Is it really so difficult to understand why the UK government and security agencies are now taking a closer look.

Hey fellas, don';t gang up on me, I know my opinion is likely to be counter to the rest of this thread, but some need to wake up and see the other side of the argument instead of being so protective and subjective with their viewpoint.

no one is disputing what they "could" be used for, lets take RC cars, they have already been used in bomb attacks, but they have not banned them or regulated them, Rc aircraft have been around for how many years with no issues ?  yes, these are different, but why should people suffer due to over sensationalized paranoia ?

how many Bombs have been remote detonated via a mobile?  yet they dont ban mobile phones.

yes we see vids that are dubious and irresponsible, but over all the majority of the RC world are responsible.

how many people get injured, hand missing, fingers missing with Fireworks? the rules, ages, and restrictions are there, but does it stop the stupid ones? No.

all you can do is put in place rules and laws, for which we already have, sort out and convict those breaking them, and those who are responsible it wont matter either way. 


As for zero tolerance, what would you rather the UK do then? Ban them like the other countries that can see the "darker" side? and are you also stating that because im not commercial and fly and video for my personal entertainment only, im not responsible ?

[Friskle]

Would I be wrong to assume that you are a tad resentful at having to pay your £1600+ to be ';qualified'; when you see others paying nothing to do essentially the same thing?

he probably may be, but then that is his his or her choice to go commercial, not the fault of those that simply want it to be a hobby or past time.

[Biffa]

 

[rockliffe]

Would I be wrong to assume that you are a tad resentful at having to pay your £1600+ to be ';qualified'; when you see others paying nothing to do essentially the same thing?

Hiya, resentful? Hmm, I hadn';t thought of it to be honest, but if I was to be honest, yes, maybe a little, but not because I have to pay £1600 but more that, like others, I am doing things properly. I';ve always had a ';thing'; about others who spoil it for the majority by being cowboys and doing what they want because they think it';s their ';right.'; Years ago, I was at the forefront of Hang Gliding in the UK, about 1976. There were very few rules and regulations at first and it was mainly down to the small flying groups to try and administer some kind of flying etiquette and rules on the land we were flying. Needless to say, there were often heated arguments with those who would arrive on the hill, completely ignore everyone and just do what they wanted to do. This in turn had a negative impact on the group as we were told that if we couldn';t control visiting flyers then we would have to stop flying all together.

So, am I resentful of those who disregard flying recommendations and rules? Bloody right I am, and I get tired of those who ';go off on one';  blurting that it';s their right to do as they please at the cost of everyone else. Sorry, but you did ask 

[rockliffe]

Sure, I get some of the replies, and I see your points, but I still believe to allow anyone, at any time, to fly wherever and whatever they like, just isn';t realistic.

BTW, anyone want to buy a Turnigy 6cell 6000Mah LiPo? 

[Biffa]

Sure, I get some of the replies, and I see your points, but I still believe to allow anyone, at any time, to fly wherever and whatever they like, just isn';t realistic.

Well you';re not just allowed to fly anywhere though are you?

[rockliffe]

Well you';re not just allowed to fly anywhere though are you?

Steve, that';s my point. No you';re not, but many, many are doing so...

[Biffa]

Steve, that';s my point. No you';re not, but many, many are doing so...

And plenty of people drive cars without licences etc etc...

This is what has very quickly driven me from this forum, the constant need to find one or two news articles and think the arse is suddenly going to fall out of multi rotors because some chump did this or that!

[Hands0n]

This is what has very quickly driven me from this forum, the constant need to find one or two news articles and think the arse is suddenly going to fall out of multi rotors because some chump did this or that!

Noooo, don';t go!     

I think the reaction is natural to those of us who will feel protective of the hobby and also feel that it is under some kind of threat.  It is a bit like a scream in the dark, but the only people hearing us is ourselves.  Probably futile in the long run.

There will always be those that spoil it for the others.  People will break or disregard the rules no matter what.  But I don';t agree on outright bans, or the need to take up training for such a hobby where it is used just as that and nothing more.

Whatever laws and rules are made we as a nation need to be very wary of gold plating, a bit of a British tendency.  But I remain optimistic that the CAA will continue to recognise the value and part to play of hobbyist model flying. 

In the main, I think we';ve just got to get through this period of discovery by the media, they';ll very soon tire of us. We really aren';t that great news.  Within 12 months there won';t be a story published about us.

As to terrorist use - if it were that effective it would have happened already. More likely with model planes than multi-rotors because of their enhanced range.  Everything bar the explosive material obtainable from HobbyKing!   But it doesn';t happen. So we really shouldn';t make ourselves scared of outside possibilities, ghosts in the wardrobe, monsters under the bed.

My views

[kilby]

Sure, I get some of the replies, and I see your points, but I still believe to allow anyone, at any time, to fly wherever and whatever they like, just isn';t realistic.

BTW, anyone want to buy a Turnigy 6cell 6000Mah LiPo? 

Sorry I';m very confused now.

I believed that everybody was under the same basic restriction regarding where we are allowed to fly without potential issues.

Distance from people, objects, airfields and silly things like permission to access the land you are on.

You do have additional obligations insurance, notifying ATC et al, but considering you are ping paid to suffer the additional obligations then please don';t complain.

I don';t drive to and from work worrying about a quad falling on my car, I';m more worried about some rat boy chucking a brick of a motorway bridge, there';s laws against that too but it still happens and will cause more damage than a quad (even a heavy one will mostly self destruct before passing through the windscreen)

As for the security and privacy nonsense (and it is precisely that) to which is always hauled out, it';s funny how it';s always by those who gain from

1Watching others

2 Those who benefit from fear and uncertanty

3 Are completely ignorant of the matter

4  Generally restrict everybody except themselves

So what would you have to build that would enable you to spy on somebody from the air without them noticing or to perform surveillance on a property.

Considerably more than a gopro sony nex 3 and a consumer grade multirotor that what, even commercial rigs would be fairly obvious and have a duration which is short.

A small 3g router & IP web am would more than cover the situation in every way.

Delivery of explosives is not a real option as multiple terrorist groups have proved as delivering a kilo of anything via models isn';t really viable (not accurate enough, and too small an amount of explosive to ensure destruction of a target)

Btw my working life does require me to speak to those who are involved in real security roles who in turn do work with the more obscure alphabet soup guys.

[kilby]

Btw laws and regulations still don';t prevent selfish idiots doing whatever they want.

Only visible prosecutions if such selfish morons from doing such things and even then.

The answer is not more regulation (as you appear to be espousing)

[rockliffe]

Btw laws and regulations still don';t prevent selfish idiots doing whatever they want.

Only visible prosecutions if such selfish morons from doing such things and even then.

The answer is not more regulation (as you appear to be espousing)

Forgive me, more regulations is not what I want to see, but I agree, more prosecutions by the CAA for the morons will maybe be a good starter. BTW, it reminds me what was said earlier in the thread, I remember when Hang Gliding first started to hit the bad press in the late seventies, there were people, quite vocally, and in government, who were advocating a ban on Hang Gliding. The newspapers were full of scare mongering articles. One of the best reasons I read for banning Hang Gliding was it distracted drivers when they drove past a flying site!! So sure, there will always be the ignorant reporting of anything and while I don';t wish to see further regulations per se, personally, I would like to see the enforcement of current recommendations for anyone or hobbyist who flies a UAV.

[orfordness]

I don';t think MORE regulation is required, just effective enforcement of the existing rules....

A few high profile cases to wake up Joe Public wouldn';t go amiss, prosecute the guy flying over the football match, confiscate his equipment even.

However I DO believe insurance should be in someway mandatory....

Steve