Search results

"I always design stuff so that batteries will detach in a crash." Interesting. In the UK one is encouraged to have the lipos in a rigid structure to protect them from being pierced in the event of a crash, which would preclude detaching them. Also, I assume you don't design the (£20,000)...

A quote from elsewhere, from the diver who recovered the camera: "The camera was attached to a remote-controlled helicopter — the helicopter floated to the top and they managed to fish that out. the camera had sunk and they had even bought a catfish net to try and get it out." I'm surprised...

I am not sure that it took any particular balls. I have no idea if the camera was owned by the pilot but it may well not have been. Regardless, do we know why the pilot lost control? The losing of the GPS connection mentioned earlier shouldn't cause the craft to crash; switch to a non-GPS...

There is a tendency in the UK to issue notams for all sorts of (IMHO) daft things. Kite flying, ascending weather balloons, etc. The main problem is, so what? You're not going to avoid a 10 nm radius around a balloon the exact location at a point in time you have no way of knowing. Also...

There is no prohibition against flying aircraft (i.e. ones with people in them) in an AIAA. You could contact the responsible authority, which will likely be a nearby military unit and inform them of your intended activities. They might be able to offer guidance as to their preferred times for...

Sorry, yes I meant likely. As for the rest, you do realise I wasn't even commenting on your post about the Chinese man, right? So nor was I suggesting you were unPC or anything else. Mine was a response to the suggestion by another poster that you should react a certain way to all Chinese...

Absolutely. It's a healthy discussion, all the better without the unjustified stereotyping.

I agree completely and in fact you've reasserted my own argument. By all means prevent the guy taking 100 photos because it's unlikely he is doing that with a criminal intent, rather just to show his friends etc. My comment (which having been removed renders this whole discussion confusing and...

The same likelihood of a threat represented by someone Chinese with a camera, i.e. the vast vast vast majority of Americans with a backpack are no threat whatsoever. Similarly the vast vast vast majority of Chinese people with a camera are not out to steal anything. I was trying to demonstrate...

Doesn't seem likely that that was more than 150 meters from that crowd which looked like more than 1000 people, as required by article 167 of the ANO.

I'm in NW3. Drop me a line if you like.

Yes. Line of sight operations doesn't mean you can't take your eyes off the craft. After all, if you didn't you wouldn't be maintaining a good lookout. [/COLOR]

Easy. Flexacopter. Or if you want eight rotors, Kratos. Fabulous quality, takes down for transport in a few minutes at most. Note, 4 rotors are not inherently "less stable" than 6 or 8.

AustinFPV, you may be right, but at least the CAA rules in the UK mean that we can operate commercially, legally, unlike the lack of the same rules in the US.

Paul, you should read articles 166 and 167 of the Air Navigation Order. Those articles apply regardless of if you're flying commercially or not. There is no airspace issue, if the total weight of the craft including batteries is under 7Kg (which I am sure it was). The legality of this...

No problem. I think some people didn't really believe me so seeing your clarification email from the CAA might help them to do so, so it was a useful exercise. [/COLOR]

Yep. Whether the CAA choose to pursue them (clearly, so far, they haven't) is another matter, but that doesn't mean they are not contravening article 167 which as I say, I think is clear. [/COLOR]

I'm guessing you've not dealt with the CAA much! I don't really understand why people say the rules are unclear. They are completely clear. If the rule was that you could fly a camera close to people and in built-up areas if you weren't doing so for commercial gain, the rules would say that...

Sorry old chap, I think perhaps it's me that's confusing you! Let me have another stab it. I agree that article 167 applies to you in your (and my) commercial endeavours. As you say, that involves ops manuals, demonstrated ability and so on. The point that I am trying hard to make, for the...

I think there is still some confusion here. Where is "surveillance" defined as "commercial"? But to the broader point, where does it say that aticle 167 only applies to commercial? My point was, and still is, you can be acquiring data without being commercial (i.e. taking non-commercial...