sandgrownun Posted at 2016-10-23 12:47
I agree the UK CAA laws are confusing.

For example:

As I mentioned above, if you have a companion with you spotting, you can fly up to 1,000 feet. But you must be 50 metres away from other people or property. But you cannot fly in a congested area like towns or cities and must be 150 metres away.
So you'd have to fly out over the water to film the top of Blackpool Tower.....

And here's the handy exemption allowing us to go to 1,000 feet.....
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/moda ... =detail&id=7344

Im hoping to take my drone to Austria Mid Feburary, if it turns up in time that is !
Im going Snowboarding in Mayrhofen and was hoping for some snowboard / mountain shots
Am i going to get arrested for using it on slopes ? lol {:4_177:}

DanCarpy Posted at 2017-1-9 12:17
Im hoping to take my drone to Austria Mid Feburary, if it turns up in time that is !
Im going Snowboarding in Mayrhofen and was hoping for some snowboard / mountain shots
Am i going to get arrested for using it on slopes ? lol

Actually Austria has the most restrictive drone law in Europe. You r definitely not allowed to fly a drone in a skiing area. If u find an unpopulated area and want to take fotos or videos u need a permission. The fine for violating is €22000,-
Insurance is mandatory btw.

erhard Posted at 2017-1-9 15:12
Actually Austria has the most restrictive drone law in Europe. You r definitely not allowed to fly a drone in a skiing area. If u find an unpopulated area and want to take fotos or videos u need a permission. The fine for violating is €22000,-
Insurance is mandatory btw.

I don't have insurance and live in Vienna, luckily the Law Enforcment is busy with Refugees at the moment, so they don't care too much

They changed the law anyway, you don't need any permission when flying, except when taking photos/filming and flying in an urban area, then you need a permission/insurance.

in Turkey,

there is a drone law, they copied from Europe, but nobody cares unless it is near to airports. otherwise citizens usually admires the drone and nobody gets irritated.

Wellsi Posted at 2017-1-9 12:15
As I mentioned above, if you have a companion with you spotting, you can fly up to 1,000 feet. But you must be 50 metres away from other people or property. But you cannot fly in a congested area like towns or cities and must be 150 metres away.
So you'd have to fly out over the water to film the top of Blackpool Tower.....

No - You are wrong!

You cannot fly to 1,000ft agl. 400ft is the maximum permissable by the CAA for SUSA.

You are citing an FPV exemption (For the ANO 94(3) which is implicit in its restriction. This is granted for pure FPV flying only and not flying with a camera equipped to record. Once you have a UAV with a recording device attached you are then classed as having data acquisition equipped RPAS and under the restrictions of 393, 94/5.

Please get your facts correct before posting them on a board like this. There are enough idiots out there already without them reading incorrect 'advice' and thinking they can legally fly their Mavic up to 1,000ft AGL.

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-10 06:11
No - You are wrong!

You cannot fly to 1,000ft agl. 400ft is the maximum permissable by the CAA for SUAS aircraft.

If you take the SD card out is it still a recording device?

SJT Posted at 2017-1-10 06:40
If you take the SD card out is it still a recording device?

Yes.......

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-10 06:11
No - You are wrong!

You cannot fly to 1,000ft agl. 400ft is the maximum permissable by the CAA for SUAS aircraft.

Nope. Even the current consultation, full of errors and omissions as it is, mentions the curious exception that as long as your SUAV is below 7kg there is no ceiling beyond line of sight...

* and controlled airspace limits


(https://www.gov.uk/government/up ... e-use-of-drones.pdf - section 5.17 (B) )

erhard Posted at 2017-1-9 15:12
Actually Austria has the most restrictive drone law in Europe. You r definitely not allowed to fly a drone in a skiing area. If u find an unpopulated area and want to take fotos or videos u need a permission. The fine for violating is €22000,-
Insurance is mandatory btw.

I'm sorry to say but it's worse in Sweden since you are not permitted to fly at all with a camera attached.
How ever there is a change coming in the summer of 2017

Ange1walk Posted at 2017-1-10 03:58
I don't have insurance and live in Vienna, luckily the Law Enforcment is busy with Refugees at the moment, so they don't care too much

They changed the law anyway, you don't need any permission when flying, except when taking photos/filming and flying in an urban area, then you need a permission/insurance.

There goes my drone dream.
Thanks for the info anyway guys, probably wont take it with now as i dont fancy trekking miles off piste just to fly alone!

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-10 06:11
No - You are wrong!

You cannot fly to 1,000ft agl. 400ft is the maximum permissable by the CAA for SUAS aircraft.

This exemption has been used for years by model aircraft fliers as well.  Here is the full wording and I cannot see any reference to exclude devices just because it has recording capabilties.  Can you show me where it stipulates that recording capabilities excludes the use of this exemption? I looked into this in great detail when I started to fly and absolutely want to get my facts right.

First off, the CAA's definition of an SUA, making no mention of recording equipment; second is the full wording of the exemption:

Small unmanned aircraft   means any unmanned aircraft, other than a balloon or a kite, having  a mass of not more than 20kg without its fuel but including any  articles or equipment installed in or attached to the aircraft at the  commencement of its flight.

>>
Small Unmanned Aircraft – First Person View (FPV) Flying

(See Note 1)

1)

The Civil Aviation Authority, in exercise of its powers under article 242 of the Air Navigation

Order 2009 (‘the Order’), exempts any person in charge of a Small Unmanned Aircraft (SUA)

from the requirement at article 166(3) of the Order to ensure that direct unaided visual contact

is maintained with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft,

persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

2)This exemption only applies if the conditions at paragraphs 3 to 7 are met.

3)

a)The person in charge is the person piloting the SUA (see Note 2).

b)The  person  in  charge  is  accompanied  by  a  competent  observer  who  maintains  direct unaided  visual  contact  with  the  SUA  sufficient  to  monitor  its  flight  path in  relation  toother  aircraft,  persons,  vehicles,  vessels  and  structures  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding collisions and advises the person in charge accordingly.

  c)The  maximum  take-off  mass  of  the  SUA  does  not  exceed  3.5kg,  including  any batteries or fuel.

4) The person in charge must not fly the SUA:

a) in  Class  A,  C,  D  or  E  airspace  unless  permission  of  the  appropriate  air  traffic  control unit has been obtained;

b) within  an  aerodrome  traffic  zone  during  the  notified  hours  of  watch  of  the  air  traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless permission of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained;

c) at a height of more than 1,000 feet above the surface (see Note 3);

d) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;

e) over  or  within  150  metres  of  an  organised  open-air  assembly  of  more  than  1,000  

persons;
f) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft;

        Miscellaneous

No:

1168

Air Navigation Order 2009
Publication date: 28 April 2016

General Exemption E

4185

UK Civil Aviation

Authority

Official Record Series 4, No. 116

8

28 April

2016

Page 2 of 3
  g) within 50 metres of any other person, apart from the competent observer, except when taking off or landing in accordance with paragraph (h);

h) within  30  metres  of  any  other person, apart  from the  competent  observer, other adjacent  model  operators,  or  any  model  flying  club  members,  during  take-off  or landing; or

i) for the purposes of aerial work

.

5)

For the purposes of this exemption, a ‘competent observer’ means someone whom the person in charge of the SUA

has designated as the competent observer.

6)

Before  designating  someone  as  the  competent  observer,  the  person  in  charge  of  the  SUA must be satisfied that he or she:

a)

has been briefed in accordance with paragraph 7;

b)

is  competent to  perform  the  tasks  which  he  or  she  may  be  called  upon  to  perform  in accordance with paragraph 7; and

c)

is competent, by direct unaided visual observation of the SUA, to assist and advise the person in charge with the safe conduct of the flight.

7)

The person in charge must ensure that:

a)

the  competent  observer  is  fully  briefed  on  the  planned  flight  and  what  is  expected of him/her taking into account

the prevailing conditions;

b)

the  competent  observer  understands  that  he/she  must  stay  directly  adjacent  to  the person in charge and maintain direct unaided visual contact with the SUA at all times, to  visually  and  aurally  monitor  the  airspace  for  other  aircraft  and  the  take

-off  and landing area for any persons;

c)

the  competent  observer  has  been  instructed  on  the  actions  to  take  in  the  event  of another aircraft being spotted and a risk of collision is assessed; and

d) the competent observer understands that he/she must advise if the SUA is proceeding beyond the point at which he/she is able to monitor its flight path sufficiently to identify a risk of collision.

8)

This exemption supersedes Official Record Series 4 No. 1108, which is revoked.

9)

This  exemption  has  effect  from  the  date  

it  is  signed  until

30  April  2017

Wellsi Posted at 2017-1-10 13:11
This exemption has been used for years by model aircraft fliers as well.  Here is the full wording and I cannot see any reference to exclude devices just because it has recording capabilties.  Can you show me where it stipulates that recording capabilities excludes the use of this exemption? I looked into this in great detail when I started to fly and absolutely want to get my facts right.

First off, the CAA's definition of an SUA, making no mention of recording equipment; second is the full wording of the exemption:

Its simple - You are not flying an SUA ..... not for the definitions of the ANO). Once you attached a camera and a system capable of recording you are flying a SUSA.


You are citing the wrong part of CAP 393 - The Mavic (and any other camera equipped recording  capable RPAS) falls under article 95 "Small unmanned surveillance aircraft" SUSA is defined in there quite clearly.

What you are referring to is what Stuart at FPV UK has lobbied for and a few years back got Lawrence at the CAA to agree to a lifting of the model flying FPV rules to 1,000agl with certain criteria.

Your aircraft does NOT fall under these criteria I'm afraid no matter how you want to look at it.
I have discussed this at length with various NQE's.

Why do you think 'The Drone Code' which is authored by the CAA and given out to 'Click and Fly' flyers when they buy a new UAV makes no mention of 1,000ft? Its because it doesn't apply!

The last thing the CAA want is the Click-n-fly brigade Mavic user up at 1,000ft without an understanding of the NAS!

  

Peter Galbavy Posted at 2017-1-10 09:24
Nope. Even the current consultation, full of errors and omissions as it is, mentions the curious exception that as long as your SUAV is below 7kg there is no ceiling beyond line of sight...

* and controlled airspace limits

So you are agreeing with me then?

The consultation paper you link to is toilet paper and hot air with no legal standing or authority.

CAP393 is law in the UK.

Hi, Thank you so much for this thread :-) I live in Czech Rep. No flying at 5,5 km diameter from the airport, not higher than 120m, not over buildings or private property (without permission of the owner), halls, monuments, group of people or animals - otherwise should be safe. Fines are up to 5.000.000 CZK (divide by approx 25 to EUR or by approx 20 to USD). Registration and insurance is obligatory for commercial use - at the Aviation office (approx. 20 forms, manuals and brochures, 1500 EUR and at least 4 months of waiting), commercial use means even if you put just a single vid to Youtube!
Fly safe!

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-11 05:11
Its simple - You are not flying an SUA ..... not for the definitions of the ANO). Once you attached a camera and a system capable of recording you are flying a SUSA.

It's not simple, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.  I'm fully aware of the drone code and understand the concerns you mention, but I'm trying to establish the precise rules, which seem contradictory.

The definition of an SUA is crystal clear where it states "any unmanned aircraft, other than a balloon or a kite, having  a mass of not more than 20kg...".  It does NOT mention anything about any other exception, so the definition of 'any' stands.

In addition, the 'Note to Editors' under the Drone code repeatedly uses the the term Small Unmanned Aircraft and goes on to mention additonal rules for SUAs with cameras.

• Operating rules for small unmanned aircraft:
• 
  
  • An unmanned aircraft must never be flown beyond the normal  unaided 'line of sight' of the person operating it. This is generally  measured as 500m horizontally or 400ft vertically.
  • An unmanned aircraft fitted with a camera must always be  flown at least 50m distance away from a person, vehicle, building or  structure.
  • An unmanned aircraft fitted with a camera must not be flown  within 150m of a congested area or large group of people, such as a  sporting event or concert.
    
       

http://www.caa.co.uk/News/Drone- ... ve-rules-of-the-sky,-or-face-prosecution/

So because the term SUA is specifically used to describe drones on the drone code page, and the SUA FPV exemption specifically states any aircraft under 20Kg, this is far from simple.
http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/modalapplication.aspx?appid=11&mode=detail&id=7344

You just telling me I'm wrong and to get my facts right doesn't actually prove anything and you haven't actually shown where you base your opinion on. You're obviously well-read on things but still that doesn't disprove the points I've made above, even if they never occurred to you before now.  I'm not advocating flying that high, but I do want to know the precise laws and rules.

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-11 05:15
So you are agreeing with me then?

The consultation paper you link to is toilet paper and hot air with no legal standing or authority.

Of course it has no legal standing or authority; it's a consultation paper....  it's just consulting on possible changes to laws and regulations....

In France, there is a official map with restriction zones : https://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/d ... ur-drones-de-loisir
Red : nofly zone.
Pink : max 30m / 100 ft
Orange : max 50 m / 165 ft
Orange light : max 60 m / 200 ft
Yellow : max 100m / 330 ft
No color : max 150m / 500 ft.

Hi all again,
I tried to collect any useful info here to a simple XLS table, see at the pic. So far I did it just for the first page of this thread, I will see if I can do the second page too (France, my Czech country etc...)
I wanted to prepare one simple sheet to be laminated and carried with... hope it helps for many people here.

superjet96 Posted at 2016-10-19 06:24
I am going to Italy for two weeks in July.  Can you point me to a web page where it states the drone laws in Italy?  I would love to bring the Mavic there but only if it is worth it.  Thanks!

I just went to Venice and had to leave the Mavic at home, as Venice is a no-fly zone for quads. In a case of an idiot spoiling it for the rest of us, there was a tourist who, earlier this year, crashed in St Mark's Square. His drone struck a tourist, a young girl. Her clothes were ripped, but fortunately she was otherwise not hurt. As a result there's a total ban there. Others from Italy will no doubt offer a.more complete picture.

Can anyone from Spain offer some info on their regs?  I'm looking at skiing in Formigal (Pyrénées) and would love to know what i need to know!

Laurent73 Posted at 2017-1-11 07:25
In France, there is a official map with restriction zones : https://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/donnees/restrictions-pour-drones-de-loisir
Red : nofly zone.
Pink : max 30m / 100 ft

Laurent - any idea the logic/rationale  behind the many, many red, localised  hexagons?

steven
Lucky you! From new year there is new law regulating drones in Latvia. Terms are quite similar to other countries. I got my drone now and should fly under new requirements.

steven
Lovely footage!

$5 dollars to register with faa here in California. Bunch of common sense rules. Mainly stay away from the city, airports. It's really for your own good. In Obamas shat economy, there's a lot of poor people with nothing better to do than try to steal anything that's not nailed down.

Our state just passed a law where minors can prostitute themselves legally. Yeah the governor signed that into law. Nothing surprises me about this state anymore. But again, thanks to our godless emperor, we are as poor as can be with 20 trillion debt and a bunch of pedophile lawmakers. I'm sure it's worse in Europe.

Very interesting topic. Actual for long time. Would be good to save it somehow. Is it possible to add this to favourites for example???

GMG Posted at 2017-1-11 15:45
Laurent - any idea the logic/rationale  behind the many, many red, localised  hexagons?

Hi thanks for link for Nofly zones in France... I will update it for my thread flying legallyand my XLS file soon. file soon.

GZP Posted at 2017-1-11 16:47
Very interesting topic. Actual for long time. Would be good to save it somehow. Is it possible to add this to favourites for example???

I started few weeks ago with similar thread here and I am very curious now, collecting all the data from this thread into a one XLS file, and I will put it later to my thread in some (hopefully nice) form accessible for anyone.
Thanks for all contributions here.


I am also collecting the info on:
1) Drone registration process in different countries
2) Nofly zones in different countries
3) this thread - Limits and conditions / fines / fees etc. for legal and safe flying

... hopefully it helps to promote safe using of drones, and at the same time to fight against the fear from drones, since we are all responsible pilots here :-)
Cheers!

Willik Posted at 2017-1-12 03:12
I started few weeks ago with similar thread here and I am very curious now, collecting all the data from this thread into a one XLS file, and I will put it later to my thread in some (hopefully nice) form accessible for anyone.
Thanks for all contributions here.

Really good initiative from your part.

Here is a link the fly and no fly zones in sweden.

http://daim.lfv.se/echarts/dronechart/

Flybee Posted at 2017-1-12 04:00
Really good initiative from your part.

Here is a link the fly and no fly zones in sweden.

Thanx :-) updated here

Also appreciate upvotes / positive reporting (so the thread can get to top posts soon :-)
THX.

Wellsi Posted at 2017-1-11 06:52
It's not simple, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion.  I'm fully aware of the drone code and understand the concerns you mention, but I'm trying to establish the precise rules, which seem contradictory.

The definition of an SUA is crystal clear where it states "any unmanned aircraft, other than a balloon or a kite, having  a mass of not more than 20kg...".  It does NOT mention anything about any other exception, so the definition of 'any' stands.

OK, don't forget that the 'Drone Code' is an advisory leaflet/publication whereas CAP393 is law.

There are two categories cited within the ANO under articles 94 and 95.

94 is headed up 'Small Unmanned Aircraft' and then goes on to explain the rules and/or restrictions appertaining to those aircraft. This is where the FPV extension is granted for the purpose of flying the aircraft solely by video link and with no recording/data acquisition capability

However, once you attach a camera with recording device to your aircraft it becomes (under law) a SUSA and falls under a different set of rules.

The terms and stipulations for an SUSA are given under Article 95 headed 'Small Unmanned Surveillance Aircraft'

If in doubt, please email the CAA directly at UAVEnquires@caa.co.uk where they will be happy to explain further

steven@madow.co Posted at 2016-10-18 10:28
I live in the US where I can normally fly without too much concern.  I've been asked to stop a couple of times, stopped immediately, and went on with my life.

However, I have a trip coming up to Peru in December (hopefully with a Mavic and not a P3P).  They allow drones to be flown in their country with pretty typical rules.  This sadly includes not flying over Macchu Picchu, but oh well.  They also require an expensive permit just to bring a tripod into that site, so it seems that they really just want to limit commercial photography.  I researched ahead of time and discovered that a new law recently passed so that all drones coming into the country will be confiscated for 10 days.  As my trip is 10 days, this pretty much meant that drones were a no-go.  Luckily, I speak halfway-decent Spanish and after dozens of emails with the MTC (Peruvian FAA) and Customs, I am on my way to getting pre-approval to bring the drone in, which hopefully will be smooth sailing.  I think that flying it in rural areas will be easy except at extremely tourist-filled destinations.  Now, just to hope that it doesn't rain.

That's Florida!!! Did he have the bumper sticker over his tailpipe that says, "Prius Repellent"? And with our Electoral College, Florida has the most power in our presedential elections. Is this a great country, or what? [sarcasm]

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-12 07:06
OK, don't forget that the 'Drone Code' is an advisory leaflet/publication whereas CAP393 is law.

There are two categories cited within the ANO under articles 94 and 95.

Thanks Tharg. I have done just that; I emailed them yesterday.  Because if you are correct, then removing the gimble and camera entirely from the drone would revert it back to the standard SUA type that the exemption applies to. And if that were the case, the rules need changing because the presence of a camera doesn't alter the safety or danger of flying at such a high altitude.  
Either way the exemption wording needs changing if it does exclude camera drones, because it doesn't mention that in its list of only exemptions.  
I'll post as soon as \I get a response from the CAA.

Willik Posted at 2017-1-12 03:12
I started few weeks ago with similar thread here and I am very curious now, collecting all the data from this thread into a one XLS file, and I will put it later to my thread in some (hopefully nice) form accessible for anyone.
Thanks for all contributions here.

Worth posting guidelines, for France, available in pdf format, in French and English.  
FWIW, the restrictions changed here recently, putting more constraints on fly zones for hobbyists (which has led me to start studying to qualify for a permit).
Rules for drone flights (for hobbyists)
FRENCH:
http://www.developpement-durable ... one_VF_FR_web-2.pdf
ENGLISH:
http://www.developpement-durable ... drone_VF_GB_web.pdf

Note that there's no requirement for a licence to fly a drone, except if you intend to be paid for your services using it.  In that case, details around certification are here (in French):
http://www.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/Telepilote-de-drone-civil,40997.html

In a nutshell, to qualify for commercial use, you must pass a multiple choice theory test and then "self-certify" that you've got the chops to operate it safely.  If this seems a bit haphazard, it is.  The current theory test is basically the same as the exam to pilot ultralight aircraft, which means much (the majority?) of the test is irrelevant to flying drones (e.g. learning about physiological effects of hypoxia, how Ohm's Law works, airframe characteristics...)  A tailored test for drone operators was intended to launch in January 2017 (this month), but this has now been pushed back.  

Incidentally, if you'd rather not wait for the tailored testing in France and wish to get qualified, going to easy-ppl.com and getting a subscription for their sample tests and courses is (to me) pretty good value.  If you use the promo code REDUC15, you get an additional discount. (I'm in no way affiliated with the company).

Please jump in, if I've gotten any of this wrong, fellow-flyers-in-France!

GMG Posted at 2017-1-12 09:22
Worth posting guidelines, for France, available in pdf format, in French and English.  
FWIW, the restrictions changed here recently, putting more constraints on fly zones for hobbyists (which has led me to start studying to qualify for a permit).
Rules for drone flights (for hobbyists)

Thanx :-) updated (the link for the rules was not working, so I hope I found the correct one)
cheers

I'm going to Beijing in 4 weeks.  Does anyone know the codes in China?

Willik Posted at 2017-1-13 08:47
Thanx :-) updated (the link for the rules was not working, so I hope I found the correct one)
cheers

Thanks for pointing that out. I've redone the link. Should work now.

Tharg (from the Posted at 2017-1-12 07:06
OK, don't forget that the 'Drone Code' is an advisory leaflet/publication whereas CAP393 is law.

There are two categories cited within the ANO under articles 94 and 95.

Tharg.  I too am in the UK and its been very interesting reading yours and Wellsi's posts.

I had a good google based on the information both of you have presented and its by no means very clear in my opinion.  

I am looking forward to an official response from CAA.  HOWEVER......

My understanding VERY briefly before reading these posts was: 400' from SURFACE, in line of sight, and dont be an idiot and fly it near people, airports, towns and cities etc.

With regard to the classification of the mavic, my reading has served to find the following links.
http://www.fpvuk.org/fpv-law/
http://droneaware.org/know-the-law
This states that: 'At first it would appear that FPV flying would fall under article 95 for small unmanned surveillance aircraft because the ANO definition of an unmanned surveillance aircraft is as above in 95(5). However in situations where a camera is used for the sole purpose of controlling the aircraft the flight is not considered surveillance or data acquisition'  

Given the mavic camera does not have a SOLE PURPOSE of controlling the aircraft via FPV, I would tend to agree that it cannot be classed as an FPV drone.  The mavic is equipped to undertake any form of survailance or data aquisition. I think its irrelevent whether you are ACTUSALLY recording or not, the fact is that its equipped to record and therefore isnt solely for FPV

I dont know who to agree with at the moment hahahah!!! but one things for sure, I wouldn't be surprised if the CAA response is STILL ambiguous

Good luck getting a reply from the CAA, I asked this question about CAP722 'sole purpose' months ago and got an automated response basically saying they haven't got time to talk to us.

'Purpose' should be considered by your intentions at the time, it's not a fixed thing. The purpose of my kitchen knife right now is to chop up some dead meat, if I stab someone with it it's purpose is an offensive weapon, if I shave with it it's purpose is for removing my beard.

This is what I got back from the CAA in June when I asked about 'purpose' and 'congested areas'

Dear Sir/Madam,
We are receiving a very high number of enquiries about Small Unmanned Aircraft (UA) - 'Drones' - and the various rules and requirements governing their operation within the UK. We are therefore unable to provide an individual response by e-mail or telephone in most cases and we urge enquirers to use our website and other published material.
Enquiries relating to current applications for drone aerial work should be sent to apply@caa.co.uk and we will not normally respond to these enquiries until the 28 day processing time has been exceeded.

Matt-and-Riley Posted at 2017-1-13 15:59
Good luck getting a reply from the CAA, I asked this question about CAP722 'sole purpose' months ago and got an automated response basically saying they haven't got time to talk to us.

'Purpose' should be considered by your intentions at the time, it's not a fixed thing. The purpose of my kitchen knife right now is to chop up some dead meat, if I stab someone with it it's purpose is an offensive weapon, if I shave with it it's purpose is for removing my beard.

Okay, so I have re-read various CAA documentation and laws and your comments 'Matt-and-riley'

I think you make a very valid point about the purpose not being fixed. Below is my interpretation having read  'CAA General Exemption E 418' which is to do with FPV flying in conjunction with The Air Navigation Order 2016 (Parts 95 and 96).

The mavic camera can be used for FPV flying and so long as you dont take any pictures or video at between 400' and 1000'  then you can go as high as 1000'.

But... lets look at this realistically.... WHY ON EARTH would you want to go that high, just for the kicks of flying that high???    Ok, agreed how will anyone tell whether you have taken video/pictures that high but I'm not one to break the rules and therefore wouldn't.  *edit*  DJI flight logs record an entry when you take a picture/video and therefore its very traceable*

I conclude:   you CAN go to 1000' with the Mavic by using FPV view, if you have a competent spotter maintaining line of sight.   as i point out though.... apart from being able to see what the view is like on your screen/FPV goggles, why would you want to go that high if aren't allowed to take pictures/video.

I happy for anyone to share their views with me, as I by no means feel I know the laws/regulations very well.  I am just presenting my interpretations.... so dont bash me for doing this as I know some people have had done to them.