Hot off the UK government website....new restrictions being considered for the drone bill being drafted this year. It all sounds reasonable, except the proposed requirement for filing flight plans before flying!

https://www.gov.uk/government/ne ... he-misuse-of-drones

For any who are interested; here is a 97 page pdf detailing the proposals:

https://assets.publishing.servic ... rones-in-the-uk.pdf

From that document, with regards to the mandatory filing of pre-flight plans (FINS stands for "Flight Information and Notification System"):

"5.20 When would be the most suitable time to file a pre-flight notification is still being considered. Ensuring notifications are filed well in advance of take-off could be beneficial for forward planning and allow authorities (such as the police, or security officials) more time to address any concerns relating to a particular flight. However, a requirement to file a notification too far in advance could be restrictive to drone users who wish to spontaneously fly their drone.  
5.21 It is also important to consider data reliability of the FINS(s). Large lead times between the pre-flight notification and take-off could lead to inaccurate data on the FINS(s), unless some form of further validation of the flight could be used just before take-off.  ─ For example, a person files a pre-flight notification five days in advance of flying, indicating at 13:30 they will use their drone at a given location. Then to ensure this information is still accurate it is verified by the drone user closer to the time of flight.   
5.22 Further consideration is being given to the possible maximum and minimum time before flight a notification could be made. If these proposals were introduced, a balance would need to be struck between ensuring data reliability and safety in drone use, and not creating overly burdensome legislation.  
5.23 For context and comparisons within traditional aviation, the general International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) requirement is that aircraft should have flight plans filed at least 60 minutes before clearance to start-up or taxi is requested."

What doesn't seem to be on the cards at the moment is any allowance for spontaneous flying. i.e. you wouldn't be able to carry your drone, spot something you want to take a look at, and take off. You'd have to wait a certain amount of time. You would have to plan and file every flight ahead of time. And if you don't have an internet connection when you spot something then you're completely out of luck.

It's good with age restriction, registering the drone etc. FINS is too much for non-commercial hobby fliers as we won't be able to comply with it and it will do more damage to the hobby or people will ignore it (and may be get into trouble)

I think that people have not read the first paragraph leading into FINS which states "certain drone users and/or for certain activities,"

To me this implies that probably they are looking at this for commercial users or large drones. Remember that the document covers all aspects of drone use which may soon include parcel delivery and taxi services if the developments in the USA are to be believed.

For us small drone leisure users , flight plans will not happen. No-one really plans a flight and in truth the authorities also have little interest.

Martin Lines Posted at 2018-7-26 03:54
I think that people have not read the first paragraph leading into FINS which states "certain drone users and/or for certain activities,"

To me this implies that probably they are looking at this for commercial users or large drones. Remember that the document covers all aspects of drone use which may soon include parcel delivery and taxi services if the developments in the USA are to be believed.

Actually, earlier in the document "certain drone users" refers to those users who are operating drones that weigh more than 250g. The rationale is that these are more likely to cause injury or damage than drones weighing less than that. The Spark certainly falls into that category.

"5.12 The proposal being considered would include relevant drone use outside, where the take-off mass is 250g and over. This mass would exclude any fuel, but would include any additional goods added to the drone, such as a camera. Drones with a mass of 250g and over are being considered for inclusion as they are more likely to injure a person in an accident. They are also more likely to have cameras, and fly higher, further and for longer than drones that have a mass less than 250g. It is therefore considered that use of these drones require a higher level of regulation, in order to increase the accountability of these users. The same rationale was applied in the 2018 Amendment Order laid on 30th May 2018 which provide, for example, for registration of SUA operator in respect of flights by small unmanned aircraft with a mass of 250g or more, coming into force on 30th November 2019."

Hi. Thank you for sharing this information with us. Let us be aware of the rules and regulations of Drones from different locations for us to be fined. Have a safe and happy flying everyone.

JimFandango Posted at 2018-7-26 01:19
From that document, with regards to the mandatory filing of pre-flight plans (FINS stands for "Flight Information and Notification System"):

"5.20 When would be the most suitable time to file a pre-flight notification is still being considered. Ensuring notifications are filed well in advance of take-off could be beneficial for forward planning and allow authorities (such as the police, or security officials) more time to address any concerns relating to a particular flight. However, a requirement to file a notification too far in advance could be restrictive to drone users who wish to spontaneously fly their drone.  

"This mass would exclude any fuel"

Battery Net Weight Approx. 95 g -- it is fuel in my books.

Takeoff Weight 300g with fuel. Thus 300 - 95 =205 g

62+ Posted at 2018-7-27 14:47
"This mass would exclude any fuel"

Nice try, but tell that to the judge.

Prairie Chicken Posted at 2018-7-27 17:40
Nice try, but tell that to the judge.

Do they define "fuel" in the new regulations of other applicable  publications. ?

You're title should read "Proposed New Regulations.."

62+ Posted at 2018-7-27 22:16
Do they define "fuel" in the new regulations of other applicable  publications. ?

I don't know that, but calling it fuel is a creative way of looking at it. I don't know how it would fly (heh) in the real world, though.

Agreed .

I'm not a law expert and it have to be tested in court.
Would not like to be that individual .

Please this stinks.  The spark is practically a kite.  Planes fly over houses shaking windows n walls.  Where r their restrictions.  Just another way to keep the young n the poor down.

62+ Posted at 2018-7-27 14:47
"This mass would exclude any fuel"

Wonderful, shall I trade my P4P for a spark then, if I want to visit the UK?

I've replied to the consultation - cut off is 17 Sept!

Replied too, whatever effect it will have... They haven't asked about key questions, such as weight limits and what certifications should a pilot have/pay for.

Martin Lines Posted at 2018-7-26 03:54
I think that people have not read the first paragraph leading into FINS which states "certain drone users and/or for certain activities,"

To me this implies that probably they are looking at this for commercial users or large drones. Remember that the document covers all aspects of drone use which may soon include parcel delivery and taxi services if the developments in the USA are to be believed.

Especially with the spark, It's so versatile that flight plans are unplanned spontaneous.