Drones in Scotland
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: South of Iceland
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Drones in Scotland
No, I'm not talking about the Labour Party but about Police operated UAVs.
http://www.strathclyde.police.uk/index.asp?docId=4900
Anyone know what the legalities are on how these drones can see and avoid me when I am flying around remote areas ? Who do I sue if I get hit (and survive) ?
Have these been notammed ?
http://www.strathclyde.police.uk/index.asp?docId=4900
Anyone know what the legalities are on how these drones can see and avoid me when I am flying around remote areas ? Who do I sue if I get hit (and survive) ?
Have these been notammed ?
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know what the legalities are on how these drones can see and avoid me when I am flying around remote areas ?
Not exactly rocket science is it.....
niknak
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These beasts are designed to operate largely at low level, but equally they have capability to operate at anything from 1ft to high level.
Given that most of Scotlands scum bags operate within the capital city and other built up areas, which are in CAS, you'll never have to worry as ATC will be fully aware of any such Police operation in the area, and if you are flying in CAS, you will do as you are told, thereby avoiding said wee timerous beasties...
Given that most of Scotlands scum bags operate within the capital city and other built up areas, which are in CAS, you'll never have to worry as ATC will be fully aware of any such Police operation in the area, and if you are flying in CAS, you will do as you are told, thereby avoiding said wee timerous beasties...
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that most of Scotlands scum bags operate within the capital city and other built up areas, which are in CAS, you'll never have to worry as ATC will be fully aware of any such Police operation in the area, and if you are flying in CAS, you will do as you are told, thereby avoiding said wee timerous beasties.
It might be that they are deployed in more crime based activities if they are adopted for operational use after the trial, but I wouldn't expect to see them in Controlled Airspace during the initial trial period.
Legally, and from a safety perspective, very very problematic.
There is no formal certification basis that can be used to clear a UAV (Unmanned Aeriel Vehicle) for operation VFR in the open FIR. To the best of my knowledge, these systems contain no form of TCAS, auto-evasion, or auto-destruction system. They *might* contain a transponder, but aren't legally required to.
They almost certainly will however be operated remotely in line of sight from an operator on the ground.
But if he doesn't see you, and the UAV is being operated in unrestricted airspace - you're on your own laddie! Pray that they'll have the sense to always operate them either at low level within a connurbation, or within a NOTAMed TRA.
I doubt you'll hear anything officially, but unofficially I've heard that CAA are scared to death of what various police forces are doing with these things, and seem to be toothless to bring them under any formal control.
G
There is no formal certification basis that can be used to clear a UAV (Unmanned Aeriel Vehicle) for operation VFR in the open FIR. To the best of my knowledge, these systems contain no form of TCAS, auto-evasion, or auto-destruction system. They *might* contain a transponder, but aren't legally required to.
They almost certainly will however be operated remotely in line of sight from an operator on the ground.
But if he doesn't see you, and the UAV is being operated in unrestricted airspace - you're on your own laddie! Pray that they'll have the sense to always operate them either at low level within a connurbation, or within a NOTAMed TRA.
I doubt you'll hear anything officially, but unofficially I've heard that CAA are scared to death of what various police forces are doing with these things, and seem to be toothless to bring them under any formal control.
G
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Aberdeen, NE Scotland
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Presumably Cyberflight Ltd's operating procedures for these UAV's would include the requirement to notify the relevant ATC unit of the position, radius of operation and maximum altitude on each occasion, even when operating in the open FIR as is likely if based at Oban.
Scottish Information (in this case) would then pass this on to affected aircraft. In an ideal world!
Course if you don't talk to anyone in the FIR then, as mentioned previously, you're on your own
Scottish Information (in this case) would then pass this on to affected aircraft. In an ideal world!
Course if you don't talk to anyone in the FIR then, as mentioned previously, you're on your own
Guest
Posts: n/a
There has to be a RA(T) surely. Otherwise see-and-avoid goes out the window (that a pun or oxymoron?)
Seriously, whether in the open FIR or in central belt class D, it'd be impossible to operate with these things. At least with Police 51 (EC135) we know where we are (and them as well).
Daft idea. Hopefully Strathpol will wreck them on training exercises.
Seriously, whether in the open FIR or in central belt class D, it'd be impossible to operate with these things. At least with Police 51 (EC135) we know where we are (and them as well).
Daft idea. Hopefully Strathpol will wreck them on training exercises.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is possible that the 'drones' are being classed as 'Small Aircraft' in which case there are specified rules in the ANO which apply. These can be up to 150Kg in weight with the authority of the CAA and require the issue of an exemption if it is over 20Kg. The CAA do however state that exemptions are unlikely to be issued except for a specific flying site, which would be no use for a tactical application.
However, if a weight of less than 20Kg, then only the following seems to apply:
If they have an exemption to be between 20Kg and 150Kg, then the following restrictions are then in force:
There are also UAV documents from the CAA since the small aircraft will be conducting aerial work possibly, but I need a bit more time to track them down !!
However, if a weight of less than 20Kg, then only the following seems to apply:
Article 74
“A person shall not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to
endanger any person or property.”
All model flying activity is controlled by this article of the ANO and it is important that the operator of any model aircraft should bear this in mind at all times.
“A person shall not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to
endanger any person or property.”
All model flying activity is controlled by this article of the ANO and it is important that the operator of any model aircraft should bear this in mind at all times.
Article 73
“A person shall not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to
endanger an aircraft, or any person therein.”
Article 73 refers to people in an aircraft endangering the aircraft or persons therein, whereas Article 74 refers to persons outside aircraft endangering aircraft. Obviously only Article 74 can apply to a model aircraft. However, technically Article 73 does apply to models over 20 kg.
Article 98
Article 98 contains additional requirements to fly model aircraft safely.
Article 98 states:
“(1) A person shall not cause or permit any article or animal (whether or not
attached to a parachute) to be dropped from a small aircraft so as to
endanger persons or property.
(2) The person in charge of a small aircraft which weighs more than 7 kg
without its fuel but including any article or equipment installed in or
attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight shall not fly
such an aircraft:
(a) unless the person in charge of the aircraft has reasonably satisfied
themselves that the flight can be safely made;
(b) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless the permission of the appropriate
air traffic control unit has been obtained;
(c) within an aerodrome traffic zone during notified hours of watch of the
air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless the permission
of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained;
(d) at a height exceeding 400ft above the surface unless it is flying in
airspace described above and in accordance with the requirements
thereof;
(e) for aerial work purposes other than in accordance with a permission
issued by the CAA which may be issued subject to such conditions as
the CAA thinks fit.”
“A person shall not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to
endanger an aircraft, or any person therein.”
Article 73 refers to people in an aircraft endangering the aircraft or persons therein, whereas Article 74 refers to persons outside aircraft endangering aircraft. Obviously only Article 74 can apply to a model aircraft. However, technically Article 73 does apply to models over 20 kg.
Article 98
Article 98 contains additional requirements to fly model aircraft safely.
Article 98 states:
“(1) A person shall not cause or permit any article or animal (whether or not
attached to a parachute) to be dropped from a small aircraft so as to
endanger persons or property.
(2) The person in charge of a small aircraft which weighs more than 7 kg
without its fuel but including any article or equipment installed in or
attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight shall not fly
such an aircraft:
(a) unless the person in charge of the aircraft has reasonably satisfied
themselves that the flight can be safely made;
(b) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless the permission of the appropriate
air traffic control unit has been obtained;
(c) within an aerodrome traffic zone during notified hours of watch of the
air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless the permission
of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained;
(d) at a height exceeding 400ft above the surface unless it is flying in
airspace described above and in accordance with the requirements
thereof;
(e) for aerial work purposes other than in accordance with a permission
issued by the CAA which may be issued subject to such conditions as
the CAA thinks fit.”
There are also UAV documents from the CAA since the small aircraft will be conducting aerial work possibly, but I need a bit more time to track them down !!
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS If the UAV is the Cyberflight Super Swift Eye, then it only weighs 2.5Kg so only Article 74 would apply. If it's their SkyRover, then there's no specification data on their sparse website.
The CAA UAV documents don't add much more unless the UAV weighs more than 20Kg.
Probably not a requirement if the above assumptions are correct. As there is no Controlled Airspace there, there is no 'control' agency permission needed. The SAR authorities might establish a Temporary Danger Area, as they do on occasion today, but this does not exclude other traffic from the area. It would only allow someone such as Scottish Info to warn you that you might encounter SAR activity (ranging from our small drone to a large helicopter or even a Nimrod).
The CAA UAV documents don't add much more unless the UAV weighs more than 20Kg.
Presumably Cyberflight Ltd's operating procedures for these UAV's would include the requirement to notify the relevant ATC unit of the position, radius of operation and maximum altitude on each occasion, even when operating in the open FIR as is likely if based at Oban.
Scottish Information (in this case) would then pass this on to affected aircraft. In an ideal world!
Scottish Information (in this case) would then pass this on to affected aircraft. In an ideal world!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Strathaven Airfield
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting if they only weigh 2.5kgs.
My pet theory is that Mode S was actually to "protect" us against UAVs - but since the Rotax 914s have all been gobbled up by the US for use in drones in the Gulf, I was thinking of higher weights than a fat pigeon.
Still, thin end of the wedge, I fear.
Happy Xmas to all, come and fly at Strathaven tomorrow, weather looking good!
My pet theory is that Mode S was actually to "protect" us against UAVs - but since the Rotax 914s have all been gobbled up by the US for use in drones in the Gulf, I was thinking of higher weights than a fat pigeon.
Still, thin end of the wedge, I fear.
Happy Xmas to all, come and fly at Strathaven tomorrow, weather looking good!
A 2.5kg UAV will still do a lot of damage if it is hit by a typical light aircraft that has a propeller at the front, followed by a cockpit canopy, and flying at, say, 100 knots.
G
G
From the Strathclyde Police site, they're intending using them in Argyll, on searches for missing persons in rural areas. My reading of the page is that they will be a first response, and in operation long before a pilot is likely to have information. Glencoe/Etive would appear likely holiday time areas. I've emailed a query to the CAA today.
Moderator
Join Date: Jul 1997
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it's under 20Kgs, then you could meet them anywhere. You'll be depending on your own airmanship, your lookout, and the need for the ground operator to not endanger you. Much the same as meeting any other unknown flying vehicle in the open FIR.
If they are over 20Kg, then you shouldn't encounter them above 400' AGL. If you're operating down at that height or below, you are more likely to encounter some fast moving metal which is a lot heavier than that and will really spoil your day
If they are over 20Kg, then you shouldn't encounter them above 400' AGL. If you're operating down at that height or below, you are more likely to encounter some fast moving metal which is a lot heavier than that and will really spoil your day
It seems likely the UAV is less than 20 KG. It does not appear to be brightly coloured, or have a strobe.
If used to look for missing hillwalkers/climbers in Glenetive or Glencoe, it is likely to be operating at the same, or higher, height as that at which light aircraft fly through. Being so small, it will be difficult to see. It will be travelling at up to 100 mph. Unlike all other flying objects, there will be no lookout for me on the part of the UAV. The operator will be watching a screen showing the terrain. He will not have the desperate desire to avoid a collision at all costs, which on-board pilots have. He will not have an accurate picture of the position of an aircraft relative to his UAV, even if someone spots it, and draws it to his attention.
I am also wondering how stable its height and heading will be in the turbulence I often encounter in these glens.
An accident could perhaps lead to interesting liability cases against Strathclyde Police and the CAA.
If used to look for missing hillwalkers/climbers in Glenetive or Glencoe, it is likely to be operating at the same, or higher, height as that at which light aircraft fly through. Being so small, it will be difficult to see. It will be travelling at up to 100 mph. Unlike all other flying objects, there will be no lookout for me on the part of the UAV. The operator will be watching a screen showing the terrain. He will not have the desperate desire to avoid a collision at all costs, which on-board pilots have. He will not have an accurate picture of the position of an aircraft relative to his UAV, even if someone spots it, and draws it to his attention.
I am also wondering how stable its height and heading will be in the turbulence I often encounter in these glens.
An accident could perhaps lead to interesting liability cases against Strathclyde Police and the CAA.
