The issue with drones is they can be basically flown with zero education, and people have already done silly things with them – mostly endangering people on the ground (and not air traffic). I like drones, and they are fun, but unfortunately human nature is such that a lot of people will get a RTF (ready to fly) drone, and just go and fly without thinking about where they are flying or what they fly above.
The problem is this means there’s going to be now a huge layer of bureaucracy that’s going to end up suffocating “unmanned aircraft”, and will include things like traditional RC which has always been reasonably well behaved – because it takes time and effort to build an RC aircraft and they don’t fly themselves meaning the operator has to be reasonably skilled not to end up crashing all the time.
I have a couple of RC helis (T-Rex 500, 600 and 700, although I still need to build the 700). I never want to fly them near anyone else, and although they have gyros, unlike the drones, if I lose sight of the machine or let go of the controls, it becomes ground seeking very fast (the gyros are kind of a part of a FBW system, they aren’t there to keep the thing upright at all times). A drone on the other hand? Lose sight, no big deal – so people are tempted to see just how high they can fly them, especially as most of them have some kind of FPV (first person view) system these days. Not being educated in aviation matters, sometimes they do it right in the middle of controlled airspace rather than in class G. And now it’s gaining the bureaucrat’s attention so we’re all going to be slammed with having to register our models regardless or not if they are drones, and I bet they will want to impose geofencing on everything – including traditional RC which has really not been a problem in the past.
And of course this will all be unenforcable. The “problem drone pilots” will still get the thing out the box and fly it in silly places but almost never will be caught. Traditional RC pilots will – because they feel “responsible and all that” end up having to follow all these bureaucratic ballaches to continue with their hobby exactly as they have for decades. It’s already starting to happen in the US. I used to like taking my T-Rex 500 over to the States on holiday and go flying with some of my friends who also fly drones and RC aircraft, but now legally I have to register it if I want to do that – and you can only register it if you’re a US citizen or permanent resident because it has to be registered just like a proper aircraft in accordance with ICAO! I can’t even bring a tiny T-Rex 250 with me because it’s just heavy enough to need registration.
alioth wrote:
The “problem drone pilots” will still get the thing out the box and fly it in silly places but almost never will be caught.
Germany has just passed a “drone law” through parliament which will become effective later that year. It is of course the typical 1000 pages opus magnum type Germany lawmaking but a step in the right direction.
It regulates especially those “out of the box” drones which are sold to laypersons (aviation wise). They must have technical provisions which make it impossible to fly above a certain altitude or outside the field of view of the pilot. Flying by FPV alone without direct visual contact is forbidden. Large “professional” camera drones will require some kind of license by the operator, all drones need insurance cover. So this should already exclude the vast majority of “problem pilots” form creating dangerous situations with aircraft.
Selfmade drones are still considered to be model aircraft and are legislated as such, the relevant legislation remains unchanged. Because obvoiusly aeromodellers are quite reasonable persons in these parts and the number of reported close encounters with air traffic has always been very low.
Aviathor wrote:
Some of the comments indicate that the flight took place in the Stockholm TMA.
A very prominent landmark is briefly visible on the video, so with some help from Google Maps, I’ve pinpointed the exact address of this bozo. I’ve also double-checked with an online phone directory – and a person with the name of the Youtube uploader does live at that address.
It is indeed in Stockholm TMA, within Bromma CTR even, and about 1.5 NM from the centreline of the final to Bromma runway 30. An aircraft on the glideslope would be at about 1500’ AGL here.
If it wasn’t for the fact that the video was uploaded three years ago, I would feel tempted to report him to the police. The evidence should be very good.
Peter wrote:
Interesting work on visual avoidance for drones
Meanwhile uAvionix
And not to forget DJI and other companies already use Vision for options like active track precision landing etc.
The technology is already there.
A reminder about UK FPV exception and some useful general info here.
General Exemption E 4457
FPV UK
UAV FORECAST#
I’ve been doing model flying for about 11 years, I have worked in a model shop and now work on multirotors (drones). Multirotors like a DJI Phantom are extremely capable and are real marvels of technology. Out of the box you’ll get a few thousand feet and about 1.5 SM range. That’s all well and good, and the vast majority of owners are careful with them, not least because they are pricey.
The Mavic Pro spec quote a service ceiling of 16,404 feet at sea level.
Fuji_Abound wrote:
The Mavic Pro spec quote a service ceiling of 16,404 feet at sea level.
Probably they knew it will be unlocked and they advertise it right 
The technology is already there.
No it isn’t. There are many manned aircraft that do not carry ADSB, not to mention larger birds that will sometimes attack drones. Also, I think I’m right in saying that ADSB will simply not work without a GPS input which could be lost / jammed at any time. A rare occurrence admittedly, but if drones become ubiquitous then you don’t want outages to cause mass collisions / precautionary landings.
A passive see-and-avoid ability would complement ADSB based systems very well and seems a worthwhile thing to pursue.
From a computer vision perspective, the ability to see a tiny spot moving towards you is very different task from using global scene parameters to guide an automatic landing or track or avoid a larger object.
The vast majority of manned aircraft do not have ADS-B IN and never will. It will never be mandated for VFR OCAS in most of Europe – same with Mode C. Especially the pilots who fly at low level e.g. below 2000ft which is where most drones are found.
Airliners radiate ADS-B OUT but have no use for ADS-B IN, which is specially relevant with all the dickheads who fly drones near airport approach paths…
Optical avoidance is really clever. It would also be good to have a product for powered GA. Years ago, somebody was developing one which picked up the flash from a wingtip strobe; I guess one problem is that a lot of GA doesn’t have strobes.
Assuming straight trajectories, a target on a collision course is a stationary point in the sky, so this is a difficult one.
That “no limit dronez” site just shows how many irresponsible dickheads there are and how they are working hard to get drones banned
kwlf wrote:
No it isn’t
Peter wrote:
That “no limit dronez” site just shows how many irresponsible dickheads there are and how they are working hard to get drones banned
It is all about common sense and a bit of learning rather just prohibition BMO.
Don’t forget you can do things like this with custom-made drones at a minimum cost.
