Thanks for all the leg work Matt. I really hope they dont sack off the 50m bubble. The 50m bubble is what makes going through the GVC/OA process worth it.
No problem at all; it's what I'm here for eh? :) Me too - it would definitely be a backwards step for the sector in the UK, in my opinion... It'll be interesting to see what happens and what, if any changes are made. Stay tuned, I've got my ear to the ground and I'll update everyone as and when I hear anything! :) Matt
Thanks for the quick update Matt. I hadn’t heard the rumour so your previous info had caused a bit of a concern. I realise that they can still change this but it would ‘appear’ not intention do do so in the near future (fingers and toes crossed). Have to say that I am already using the Mini3 for more and more work.
No worries at all! :) Exactly that; they're looking into it and it may change but likewise... They may do their review and realise that it has been proven to be intrinsically safe with the current control measures in place... Fingers crossed. Stay tuned, I'll do my best as always to keep you all up to date!
Thanks Matt. I have had a few days to mull this over, particularly your comment at the end about OSC. I WAS just about to invest in a new craft by research work. So I don't fly 'commercially' but the OA allows me to fly the areas I want to fly and not worry about uninvolved people (open countryside but with many rights of way with walkers etc whose presence is unpredictable). Have to say I am now wondering whether this is a good idea. An OSC is just something I don't have time or money.
Please tell me you've been selected for your thoughts and input into their review Matt.. I dont have the stats for how many injuries have been sustained by uninvolved people being hit by drones in the UK over the last year, but I haven't heard of any..
I haven't I'm afraid; I think they're planning on doing it all internally at the moment but it's something we WILL be pushing for... Consultation and industry representation. From our side; we're not even classed as a key stakeholder, so we've typically only found out about changes after they've been announced to the public. To be fair; I don't think any of the RAE's are officially in 'that' circle at the moment... Some of them are by proxy, because they've got a seat via other industries and connections. There have recently been a few changes inside the CAA, too, that will (fingers crossed) mean that the information flow and comms is/are managed better. We've already seen this in the last 7 days which is a BIG STEP FORWARD! :) Likewise, I've heard of a few incidents (literally, a couple) but none that have led to notifiable injury. So it'll be hard to justify any major changes to the regulations from an evidence based risk perspective but we shall see. I'll keep fighting the corner for us all and I'll do my best to keep everyone updated, so stay tuned! :)
@@UAVHub I agree totally. When any industry is reviewed, they collate information from the market/organisational leaders in order to put forward appropriate changes needed.
The CAA need to change one of the questions on the test for the flyer ID. The question relates to flying over people and the correct answer according to the CAA is with a sub 250 gram drone or a drone certified as C1. Clearly the CAA have not updated the test since the DfT stuck their oar in.
Yeah, there's quite a lot of stuff they'll need to update and get on top of over the next few weeks... I suppose the issue at the moment is that the changes don't actually come into effect until 31st December 2022... So technically, the C Class stuff that's in there at the moment is correct right now. What they NEED to do is to place a caveat into that training NOW, to let people know - otherwise, there'll be people who get their Flyer ID in the next few weeks, think they're doing everything right and their knowledge is out of date in just a few weeks time. Be interesting to see if it changes on the 31st or not, or if the 'old' teaching still ends up available in January...
This would make PDRA01 next to useless. There are very few real world scenarios where you cannot rule out overflight of uninvolved people. Their wording sounds very much like this will happen, talking about the opportunity to review it etc. I would be really interested to understand what had materially changed in the threat landscape to mean that PDRA01 would require this change.
It would... It's something we had to deal with back in the 'PfCO Days' and it wasn't impossible to overcome but it took a little 'artistic license' at times (that I don't think we'd get away with now)... I agree; the wording has been very carefully written, so as to rule nothing out, but to placate us all in the meantime. That's the question I've already pre-emptively posed back to them and if the changes are made, I'll be putting in a FOIA request to see the evidence that required such a major change in the risk assessment. Stay tuned! :)
Nice one Matt, as an OA holder I rarely fly over anybody that I can physically see even with something as light as my A2S. IF the rules were changed too a cylinder then my OA would have less value I imagine.
I guess it depends on how and where you operate... For some people if this were to change it'll have minimal impact but for many; the entire reason for getting permissions and paying for an OA each year is to have the OPTION of overflight with larger drones if they need to. Fingers crossed, we maintain the current privileges but for now, I guess it's a waiting game! :S
Do we all feel as though the goal posts are moving? But the biggest question, are the CAA removing themselves from this so that the likes of companies that want to use uav/uas for deliveries must take the risk and financial responsibility? 🤔
Yep... Although I have to say... With all the digging I've been doing, I'm not convinced it's something that's actually being driven by the CAA. I think there's direction coming from somewhere else, that they've got to do what they're doing... But WHY and have the impacts on the industry been considered? If so, we NEED to see the evidence/CBA behind any proposed changes... If not, then WHY change? An interesting few months ahead for us, I reckon... Stay tuned! :)
@@UAVHub or do they just see the industry as huge corporate companies going forward, rather than small individuals doing critical work with small uas? These companies aren't looking for gvc qualified pilots, they want full automation with their uas setups. That puts a new meaning on how airspace is used, and with that comes the ability to charge and make profit from lower airspace. That is a good motivation, especially from a government perspective...
This sounds more like an instruction from the DfT than directly from the CAA to me. The announcement about not accepting the C1 marking scheme I suspect is the death knell for Drones in the UK. I hope I'm wrong but suspect we are in for some of the world's toughest regulation regarding drones. Obviously this gives the politicians to say disingenuously that they haven't banned anything, just made it safe while effectively it becomes a ban on anything outside of flying in the middle of nowhere.
I'd 100% agree - the deeper I try and go on this; the more obvious it seems, that someone's got the long-screwdriver out and is steering the CAA in certain directions. Who and why, I have no idea but I'll keep digging... And I'll do my best to keep bringing you guys the up to date info as and when I get it! :)
If the CAA do move ahead with this, I’d be interested to know their justification. The whole purpose of the OA or GVC is to prove you are safe to operate drones under certain separation distances from uninvolved people
Me too - that's the big question that we're prepping for if the changes DO come. Although it's not something we've not dealt with before as permissions holders successfully... It certainly detracts from the whole point of moving to the PDRA/EASA regulations in the first place. We'll be back to square one but with the CAA and DfT having spent MILLIONS taking us all along fort he journey. We're on it though... So stay tuned! :)
Thanks for all the leg work Matt. I really hope they dont sack off the 50m bubble. The 50m bubble is what makes going through the GVC/OA process worth it.
No problem at all; it's what I'm here for eh? :)
Me too - it would definitely be a backwards step for the sector in the UK, in my opinion... It'll be interesting to see what happens and what, if any changes are made.
Stay tuned, I've got my ear to the ground and I'll update everyone as and when I hear anything! :)
Matt
Thanks for the quick update Matt. I hadn’t heard the rumour so your previous info had caused a bit of a concern. I realise that they can still change this but it would ‘appear’ not intention do do so in the near future (fingers and toes crossed). Have to say that I am already using the Mini3 for more and more work.
No worries at all! :)
Exactly that; they're looking into it and it may change but likewise... They may do their review and realise that it has been proven to be intrinsically safe with the current control measures in place... Fingers crossed.
Stay tuned, I'll do my best as always to keep you all up to date!
Thansk Matt, this kind of update is super useful for us. Just subscribed 👍
No worries at all; I'll do my best to keep them coming... Welcome to the Crew! :)
Can you recommend a drone supplier in the uk who will ship internally please
Thanks Matt. I have had a few days to mull this over, particularly your comment at the end about OSC.
I WAS just about to invest in a new craft by research work. So I don't fly 'commercially' but the OA allows me to fly the areas I want to fly and not worry about uninvolved people (open countryside but with many rights of way with walkers etc whose presence is unpredictable). Have to say I am now wondering whether this is a good idea. An OSC is just something I don't have time or money.
Please tell me you've been selected for your thoughts and input into their review Matt.. I dont have the stats for how many injuries have been sustained by uninvolved people being hit by drones in the UK over the last year, but I haven't heard of any..
I haven't I'm afraid; I think they're planning on doing it all internally at the moment but it's something we WILL be pushing for... Consultation and industry representation.
From our side; we're not even classed as a key stakeholder, so we've typically only found out about changes after they've been announced to the public.
To be fair; I don't think any of the RAE's are officially in 'that' circle at the moment... Some of them are by proxy, because they've got a seat via other industries and connections.
There have recently been a few changes inside the CAA, too, that will (fingers crossed) mean that the information flow and comms is/are managed better.
We've already seen this in the last 7 days which is a BIG STEP FORWARD! :)
Likewise, I've heard of a few incidents (literally, a couple) but none that have led to notifiable injury. So it'll be hard to justify any major changes to the regulations from an evidence based risk perspective but we shall see.
I'll keep fighting the corner for us all and I'll do my best to keep everyone updated, so stay tuned! :)
@@UAVHub I agree totally. When any industry is reviewed, they collate information from the market/organisational leaders in order to put forward appropriate changes needed.
Would it be worth buying a C class drone for use only in the EU on trips there ?
Above +- 2kg use parachute for commercial and a 1000 foot ceiling. Under 250g you take your chances like a car
So in short as commercial pilots the update is simply "As you were"! And the caveat is "we can change the rules at any time".
The CAA need to change one of the questions on the test for the flyer ID. The question relates to flying over people and the correct answer according to the CAA is with a sub 250 gram drone or a drone certified as C1. Clearly the CAA have not updated the test since the DfT stuck their oar in.
Yeah, there's quite a lot of stuff they'll need to update and get on top of over the next few weeks... I suppose the issue at the moment is that the changes don't actually come into effect until 31st December 2022... So technically, the C Class stuff that's in there at the moment is correct right now.
What they NEED to do is to place a caveat into that training NOW, to let people know - otherwise, there'll be people who get their Flyer ID in the next few weeks, think they're doing everything right and their knowledge is out of date in just a few weeks time.
Be interesting to see if it changes on the 31st or not, or if the 'old' teaching still ends up available in January...
This would make PDRA01 next to useless. There are very few real world scenarios where you cannot rule out overflight of uninvolved people.
Their wording sounds very much like this will happen, talking about the opportunity to review it etc.
I would be really interested to understand what had materially changed in the threat landscape to mean that PDRA01 would require this change.
It would... It's something we had to deal with back in the 'PfCO Days' and it wasn't impossible to overcome but it took a little 'artistic license' at times (that I don't think we'd get away with now)...
I agree; the wording has been very carefully written, so as to rule nothing out, but to placate us all in the meantime.
That's the question I've already pre-emptively posed back to them and if the changes are made, I'll be putting in a FOIA request to see the evidence that required such a major change in the risk assessment.
Stay tuned! :)
Nice one Matt, as an OA holder I rarely fly over anybody that I can physically see even with something as light as my A2S. IF the rules were changed too a cylinder then my OA would have less value I imagine.
The value would pretty much evaporate for me. Fingers crossed it doesn't happen.
I guess it depends on how and where you operate... For some people if this were to change it'll have minimal impact but for many; the entire reason for getting permissions and paying for an OA each year is to have the OPTION of overflight with larger drones if they need to.
Fingers crossed, we maintain the current privileges but for now, I guess it's a waiting game! :S
Yep; I think that'll be the case for a LOT of OA holders... As you say, fingers crossed it doesn't happen and nothing changes! :)
Do we all feel as though the goal posts are moving? But the biggest question, are the CAA removing themselves from this so that the likes of companies that want to use uav/uas for deliveries must take the risk and financial responsibility? 🤔
Yep... Although I have to say... With all the digging I've been doing, I'm not convinced it's something that's actually being driven by the CAA.
I think there's direction coming from somewhere else, that they've got to do what they're doing...
But WHY and have the impacts on the industry been considered?
If so, we NEED to see the evidence/CBA behind any proposed changes... If not, then WHY change?
An interesting few months ahead for us, I reckon... Stay tuned! :)
@@UAVHub or do they just see the industry as huge corporate companies going forward, rather than small individuals doing critical work with small uas?
These companies aren't looking for gvc qualified pilots, they want full automation with their uas setups.
That puts a new meaning on how airspace is used, and with that comes the ability to charge and make profit from lower airspace. That is a good motivation, especially from a government perspective...
This sounds more like an instruction from the DfT than directly from the CAA to me.
The announcement about not accepting the C1 marking scheme I suspect is the death knell for Drones in the UK.
I hope I'm wrong but suspect we are in for some of the world's toughest regulation regarding drones. Obviously this gives the politicians to say disingenuously that they haven't banned anything, just made it safe while effectively it becomes a ban on anything outside of flying in the middle of nowhere.
I'd 100% agree - the deeper I try and go on this; the more obvious it seems, that someone's got the long-screwdriver out and is steering the CAA in certain directions.
Who and why, I have no idea but I'll keep digging... And I'll do my best to keep bringing you guys the up to date info as and when I get it! :)
Thanks UAVhub for the good job
If the CAA do move ahead with this, I’d be interested to know their justification.
The whole purpose of the OA or GVC is to prove you are safe to operate drones under certain separation distances from uninvolved people
Me too - that's the big question that we're prepping for if the changes DO come.
Although it's not something we've not dealt with before as permissions holders successfully... It certainly detracts from the whole point of moving to the PDRA/EASA regulations in the first place.
We'll be back to square one but with the CAA and DfT having spent MILLIONS taking us all along fort he journey.
We're on it though... So stay tuned! :)