Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Banner
Welcome to our forums

Cameras on drones banned in Sweden

In a ruling yesterday, the supreme administrative court in Sweden has effectively banned cameras on drones.

The background is a long standing Swedish legislation that you need a permit to use remotely controlled surveillance cameras in areas to which the public has access (with the exception of places like a bank or post office and shops) and that permits are only granted for crime prevention, law enforcement or to prevent accidents. The court has now ruled that the same legislation applies to cameras on drones. As drones are virtually always operated over areas to which the public has access you will need a permit to use a camera on a drone – a permit that essentially only the police and possibly security companies will get.

In contrast with e.g. the UK, the public generally have access to privately owned land, so even using a drone with a camera above private property will normally fall under the law.

The drone market in Sweden is now expected to be dead. It will be interesting to see if there will be a quick change to the law.

This is of course good from a flight safety point of view…

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden

In contrast with e.g. the UK, the public generally have access to privately owned land,

Not UK, but England. Scotland has a “Right to Roam” law.

Maoraigh
EGPE, United Kingdom

Airborne_Again wrote:

This is of course good from a flight safety point of view…

Hardly. How many fatal accidents have there been between drone and aircraft? None as far as I know. 0 – 0 is still just 0. From a practical point of view, the one and only safety risk in GA is what’s between the ears of the pilot/owner.

Drones for recreation, sport and competition is equal to model airplanes in Norway. They recently got new “safety” regulations. LT has made an easy access info even in English here.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

This is very bad news for us in the film industry. Aerial shots that were simply not possible to do in the past without a hugely expensive helicopter with a stabilized Wescam or Spacecam system, were now being done very cost effectively with professional drones. I’m assuming there will be some regulatory exceptions for filming, but if not, it’s a huge setback. Obviously, as a pilot, I’m worried about midairs with drones, but I don’t think this is the right way to do it. What should have been done is just to set a hard limit of 400ft (or whatever the legislation is from local CAA) and give them all ADS-B out. Problem solved.

Last Edited by AdamFrisch at 23 Oct 10:56

To be honest I don’t mind it too much. You can stop people from entering your gate (more or less), but you can’t stop an intrusive drone easily.

It would be good if you still could use a drone, with a license, such as for an event. One-off or for photography business. Is that possible in Sweden?

AdamFrisch wrote:

This is very bad news for us in the film industry

I thought this was EASA stuff? Anyway, in Norway the distinction goes between anything used for fun, recreation, sport or competition, and everything not used for those things. Making movies or reporting news commercially (for someone else) is not, and then other rules start working; the RPAS regulation. For bigger drones you need to pass an exam etc, and a whole bunch of other other stuff (haven’t really studied it). The point is, it is fully legal to use drones for whatever you want, but there are now a whole bunch of regulations to obey. For recreation, not much has changed in practice, except it is illegal to fly over people.

The elephant is the circulation
ENVA ENOP ENMO, Norway

Almost nobody can receive ADS-B. Also it does not trigger TCAS warnings.

I don’t think this will stop idiots doing what they always did.

It also won’t stop good people flying non compliant drones in places where they might do damage, so the lack of insurance is not an issue. You can buy anything from China.

It will stop ops where the driver honestly feels he needs insurance.

I am sure film makers will get permits.

Bad news for Swedish model flyers…

My feeling is there is something behind this which scared the **** out of the government, and they did a kneejerk reaction.

Administrator
Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

Well, the original poster said what it was. Invasion of privacy.

And I agree.

If I sit in my garden and someone flies a drone over my garden filming me working or sunbathing (scary thought, I agree) and then throws the result on the Internet, I don’t like that. Like you are not allowed to take pictures of someone in his own home without permission. We all have kind of accepted that we are filmed in railway stations and even shops, but not at home, not in your garden.

The ruling had nothing to do with safety, but with that.

Like with every new technology, there are good uses and bad uses. Unfortunately, the fact that such drones with cameras could be bought for very few money has gotten a lot of people ideas which were not good. Like spying on neighbours, like taking pictures of things which were not your business. If your neighbour would hold his camera over your fence regularly, wouldn’t you mind?

Clearly there have to be licensed drones for stuff such as what Adam sais, clearly there should be possibilities for legal and proper business or other stuff like SAR. But it is not necessary that every person in this world can use such tools to spy on others.

In that regard, a blanket ban is wrong, but a clear legislation what is allowed and what not is more than necessary.

LSZH(work) LSZF (GA base), Switzerland
Almost nobody can receive ADS-B.

More and more can. You’d be surprised at the % of German ultralights that do.

I don’t think this will stop idiots doing what they always did.

Of course not. Nothing has ever done that, and nothing ever will.

there is something behind this which scared the **** out of the government, and they did a kneejerk reaction

The reaction was from a court, not from government

Last Edited by at 23 Oct 15:25
EBZH Kiewit, Belgium

Peter wrote:

My feeling is there is something behind this which scared the **** out of the government, and they did a kneejerk reaction.

As I wrote, this was a court ruling. The judiciary is independent of the executive.

Considering the way the legislation is written, the ruling is quite logical. But I expect that drone users will scream bloody murder — in some cases with good reason — and that the government will soon introduce a bill to change the law. My guess is that the requirements for getting a permit will be relaxed so that users like real estate brokers and the film industry will be able to get permits.

Just like @Mooney_Driver said, this has nothing whatsoever to do with safety. I also don’t see why it should impact model flyers. Model aircraft don’t usually carry cameras, do they?

ESKC (Uppsala/Sundbro), Sweden
16 Posts
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top