My son used to be into this a lot. Eventually he got into FPV (very provocative to the authorities for various reasons, as well as a great way to smash up a lot of expensive gear) and to me as a pilot it was obvious that it is only a matter of time before some real dick (there is a small but vocal and – if you read their forums – very defensive of illegal practices sub-community) does something really stupid and the law is changed. Currently you can do what you like in Class G if below 7kg (UK).
This was in the last US AOPA newsletter. I don’t know if that photo is the actual model used but £1000-20000 gets you something fairly capable and potentially autonomous.
The CAA is publishing guidance which seems to be starting to address SUA’s (which may be prompted by Amazon) which can be found on the CAA website here and here.
<7kg does have some restrictions (about 50 m from person and structure). I think it is good that it is starting to be addressed, rather than waiting for something to happen, ignorance of the law being no excuse and all that, but that is small consolation if someone decides to see what their <7kg SUA can do near an a/d or helicopter route.
For >7kg, it seems that a Congestered Areas Operating Safety Case (CAOSC) form needs to be filed with the CAA for non-standard use (which covers quite a few things).
What might be of interest to watch out for are the results of the European FP7 project AAT.2012.7-25 ‘Assessment of the potential insertion of unmanned aerial
system in the air transport system CSA-SA – Call: FP7-AAT 2012-RTD-1’. It seems that it was tendered last year so it will take a little while to see what the results are.
In the meantime, this report from 2013 is rather interesting although I have only skimmed through it, but these are recommendations.
Sorry, I don’t use SUA’s, but am somewhat intrigued by the potential including the probability that in the coming years, they will become more normal although wary of the risks.
The thing is the law is fine as it is, and adding new laws won’t help. Enforcing the existing ones is what’s needed. If the existing ones aren’t enforced it’s all a bit pointless adding new ones because they will get ignored too.
Some of the issue is this. I have a couple of RC helicopters, and it took some effort to learn how to build them and then how to fly them (and some expense, since there were a couple of crashes along the way – RC helis have all kinds of new ways to crash that fixed wing doesn’t!). In the process of this you learn that your model is potentially dangerous – you look at the motor for a T-Rex 600 and it’s a few horsepower, more than the Briggs and Stratton in a lawnmower and those rotor blades are quite big and hard. You probably spend time with other RC people and on forums and learn that there’s a whole load of guidelines about where and when you fly them, and how you’re not supposed to endanger others. The RC community even takes note of TRAs, such as the recent one for that NATO meeting they had in the UK. The people with RTF drones? Not so much.
The ready-to-fly drones (quad/hexcopters etc) that have been around for a couple of years aren’t like that. You get them out the box, put in a battery, and any fool can fly them because the embedded computer (sometimes quite powerful, with a 32 bit ARM CPU) does most of the piloting. They haven’t invested the time and energy into learning the principles let alone the rules, and are more likely to do something very stupid. There are some groups around for the dedicated drone flier which provide the same kind of support and learning environment that the RC guys do, but they are probably a minority.
I’ve mentioned in the past that it’s only a matter of time before most RC flying gets banned because of the absurd “war on terror” and that at the current time we’re only not getting banned because so few people know about RC flying and the capabilities of things like electric RC helicopters. However with drones thrusting models into the limelight, unfortunately I can see this avenue of pleasure being closed off to us because of political kneejerking when someone who is not in the RC community ruins it for us by doing something incredibly stupid with one of these ready-to-fly drones.
Incidentally FPV flying is legal here, but you must have a spotter, and the model must remain in line of sight of the spotter (and follow all the other RC flying guidelines). The US on the other hand kneejerked recently and banned FPV altogether.
I wouldnt be surprised if it wasnt an NSA drone spying on another part of the agency or spying on another agency all together.
It is easy to ban RC models due to possible terrorist use. So now only dedicated terrorist will have them. Just like they have weapons that are already outlawed. Lets see where did I put that granade?
As long as our friends in SA continue to fund terrorists this war on terror will never end. More and more liberties will be taken away and through mutually agreed treaties, the Europeans will follow.
Currently you can do what you like in Class G if below 7kg (UK)
The next UK oddity. Over here, Radio Controlled flying is only allowed from registered fields, and limited to (I think) 400’ AGL. The next thing will be I realise I live in a decent civilised country.
BTW what’s FPV? My favourite explainer mentions, among others,
Fishery Protection Vessel of the Scottish Fisheries Protection Agency
Ford Performance Vehicles, the Melbourne-based, premium performance vehicle partner of automobile manufacturer Ford Australia
Front for Victory, a political party and alliance in Argentina
Federación Peruana de Voleibol, Spanish for Peruvian Volleyball Federation, the governing body for volleyball in Peru
Ironically, at least for those drones/FPVs flying with cameras and which may record people’s images, it may be data protection which will be the strongest means of prosecution/prevention. However, there will always be some fool who will do something unconscionably stupid. Like the 2 kids who were rolling rocks or bricks off a bridge over the motorway in 1991 or ’92 which hit a lorry, killing the driver.
and which may record people’s images
In the UK, you are free to take photos of anybody in public places (speaking in very general terms). I guess that doing it in peoples’ back gardens is a different thing… but who bothers? Most people are not famous or interesting 
The real danger here is somebody hitting an aircraft with it, or just flying around above a major airport.
Funny. There is a hearing on new regulations for this out just now here. The Norwegian CAA devides between 3 categories; Toys, model airplanes and RPAS. Only RPAS are considered to be aircraft according to the law (an aircraft with no pilot on board). Model airplanes are considered to be a flying entrapment with no pilot on board but is not considered to be an aircraft. The division between RPAS and model airplane is the use. If it’s purely recreation use, then it is a model airplane (or toy).
Toys are toys, and are not part of the regulation. Model airplanes have to be operated 150 m from houses/cars/persons, and below 120 m (unless it is done within a club). It’s not allowed to fly above prisons, military installations etc. But no other regulations are suggested.
For RPAS there is a whole range of stuff are suggested according to size in particular. The main issue is that lots of future aviation will be done by RPAS. Photography, video, surveillance are typical today, but other uses will certainly come along. This is a large industry already, and growing fast. These operations are done at low alts for the time being, but there are no reasons why RPAS cannot operate at any altitude and be of any size flying at any speed.
