Threat to Model Flying from European Regulation - EASA Prototype Rules for Unman

[kilby]

UFO does not a Martian make, it';s unidentified object which is flying, and no I wouldn';t expect them to be common.

However the easy identification at the moment is drone, whether it';s the pilot or somebody after the fact, or simply the press.

I';m not saying anybody is a liar, but it';s the current easy explanation for having seen something (lord knows it would be an explanation that would pass through my own head though whether I would give credence to that after some thought is a different matter)

OK the wording of that story is very poor(I was reading it on a phone,) and runs the 747 statement into a light aircraft statement and while light aircraft are not the fastest things in the sky is a "white drone" likely to stay in front and then climb from 50m below to 100m above at 1400 feet (given a 45 mph top speed for a white drone)

As for the Airbus at appx 3 Km altitude, that';s quite some height and over the Mets copter base, I wonder who could possibly own such a thing?

There have been a lot of claims of drones at some massive heights, and in the US some of them sound very very credible and sound like very large scale turbine driven beasts which doesn';t even bear contemplating for too long.

However the bizarre 14,000 foot encounters with apparently average consumer machines are drawing the attention away from what must be the more common ones (that even I have seen such stupidity and I don';t get out much)

There are too many idiots in the world for them not to do such things as flying within the approach paths on or near runways or a multitude of unforgivable places.

I';m not that naive I know people are that stupid and self obsessed that they do stuff like that and it needs to be taken care of.

I';m simply unable to reconcile the multi kilometer altitudes in the press with with readily obtainable equipment and still have a ';drone'; that the public would call a drone rather than a  plane.

[Powernumpty]

@Elmattbo
So have a DOW (drone off wing) button that is pressed and GPS instantly logs the position so that radar and services on the ground in a mile radius (for example) are alerted together with drone wardens that can scan the sky. Drone wardens could be anyone from Police, fire, council park wardens, volunteers, even local scanner users could be pressed into service with specific fingerprints of drones and directional antennas or even mesh connected Raspberry PI's with SDR dongles on high triangulation points. There are technological solutions that do not entail killing a whole industry because it's easier than thinking.

I';m sure there are some real events and I feel very badly disposed to those users so would happily be part of an effort to track them down and stop it happening but when thousands of people';s hobbies and livelihoods are on the line expecting a bit of evidence is perhaps understandable. If we legislate on hearsay we are no longer a civilised democracy.

[guest325]

Isn';t there just a possibility that these ';Drone'; sightings could be Military???
They wouldn';t own up to it would they???

[DarkButterfly]

Finally some real testing, the results of which would put this issue to bed for a while.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3842316/Drones-crashed-passenger-jets-mid-air-test-safety-string-near-misses-near-airports.html

[kilby]

TBH regardless of whether it is likely to cause serious damage to an aircraft or not.

Anybody who flys in aircraft flight paths should be treated as if his intention was to down the aircraft.

I was looking at the link to the proximity reports and I felt some sympathy for the glider pilot as that appeared to be a bit of confusion (with the paracender seeming not paying enough attention either)

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[H_Simpson]

Drone wardens could be anyone from Police, fire, council park wardens, volunteers, even local scanner users could be pressed into service

Er, yo mean like...?


Can't f****** wait.

[Powernumpty]

Er, yo mean like...?


Can't f****** wait.

It was meant to be a joke and you got the reference but the electronics side was serious, it must be possible with a little engineering to scan a section of sky for RF fingerprints.

[H_Simpson]

It was meant to be a joke and you got the reference but the electronics side was serious, it must be possible with a little engineering to scan a section of sky for RF fingerprints.

Lol, sorry, couldn't help myself!

BTW, god I looooove dad's army!

[Fletch]

Ahhhh .. the Daily Fail comments always make my day!!

It';s not the ones off the shelf we have to worry about. It is the rocket powered solid-state models that can easily exceed 200 km/h and carry a payload of 20 pounds.

It isn';t just the kinetic energy of the drone but the probability that is carries an explosive

I';ve been saying for some years now that it';s inevitable that one of these ridiculous and dangerous toys will come through the windscreen of an air-carrier jet and kill one or both of the pilots or get sucked into a $25 million fan-jet and destroy it, possibly causing a crash with huge loss of life. It astounds me that these dangerous and potentially lethal toys are allowed into controlled airspace.

Something else i have noticed ... its all Yanks commenting on UK airspace and UK Laws ......

Finally some real testing, the results of which would put this issue to bed for a while.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3842316/Drones-crashed-passenger-jets-mid-air-test-safety-string-near-misses-near-airports.html

[Fletch]

i want to go and troll all the Daily fail comments .... but i will not sign up on the daily fail website!

[Two-Six]

I got a lovely "written" reply from my MP Richard Benyon (Con Party):



I wonder if this is a cross-party response from the Regime or a letter he wrote all by himself. 

[hoverfly]

A typical response, padded out repeating what we already know, no real input from him.

[guest325]

Interesting statement now on BMFA website - https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2417/EASA-Prototype-Rules-for-Unmanned-Aircraft-Update
Looks like they didn';t expect such a mass of hostile responses 

[H_Simpson]

I got a lovely "written" reply from my MP Richard Benyon (Con Party):



I wonder if this is a cross-party response from the Regime or a letter he wrote all by himself. 

Not sure, but here';s mine:

[DarkButterfly]

Interesting statement now on BMFA website - https://bmfa.org/News/News-Page/ArticleID/2417/EASA-Prototype-Rules-for-Unmanned-Aircraft-Update
Looks like they didn';t expect such a mass of hostile responses 

More like they had deluded themselves into thinking the model flying/drone community were just going to bend over and take it.

Not bloody likely.

[Two-Six]

Where did my MP letter go?  I had to re-post it....

[apollo7]

I have ordered a Hubsan h501s pro, on the basis that if these stupid laws come to force, i will have a small fpv gps quad that i can take into the wilds so to speak and still fly how i like........and i have wanted one for a long time 

[insx]

Every time I see this thread in my unread list, I wonder who Unman is.