Keiran Arnold Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Noticed this little snippet in the Air Accidents Investigation Branch Annual Safety Review 2016 "Under UK regulations, the AAIB is not classed as a commercial operator flying for reward so can operate drones at accident sites under the standard regulations for recreational users." Whilst this seems to be within the spirit of the law, is this within the spirit of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Jones Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 They're not in it for commercial gain ergo not commercial therefore allowed. If an aerial view of an accident site could help to identify the sequence of events and what happened (and so helping to prevent future ones) why would you have an issue with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Former Member Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 [This posting has been removed] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keiran Arnold Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 My point is that it is not by any means recreational- whilst I agree that any means of assisting the AAIB is a good thing. As the AAIB is a government organisation, the operators are being paid for their services, and as the end product is a government report then whilst the gain is not financial there certainly is commercial gain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I agree by the same reckoning it's OK for Estate Agents to use drones to photo houses and Farmers to check their fields etc, providing they are not being paid specifically to do this work. They have opened up a can of worms here as to what defines recreational flying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Welford Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 What is the situation for emergency services (Police and Fire Services)? Do they operate drones without commercial operators' licences? Clearly again not for commercial gain, but they are used professionally. The point about commercial operators' licence is to ensure operators have appropriate knowledge about drone operation - assessment of risk and knowledge of airspace etc. AAIB guys will have this, but emergency servicers may not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denis Watkins Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Surely any "good press" from the authorities will illustrate this indispensable side of drone use And may influence drone users to look at their possession in a different light, Just maybe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Skilbeck Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Posted by Robert Welford on 23/06/2017 12:16:44: What is the situation for emergency services (Police and Fire Services)? Do they operate drones without commercial operators' licences? Clearly again not for commercial gain, but they are used professionally. The point about commercial operators' licence is to ensure operators have appropriate knowledge about drone operation - assessment of risk and knowledge of airspace etc. AAIB guys will have this, but emergency servicers may not. Didn't the police in Merseyside a few years ago have to stop using them because they didn't have a suitable license. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lee Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Here is a 26 page technical document presented at an International Conference of how & why the AAIB operate their drones. I'd venture to suggest that any further requirements are superfluous. With regards to the Police here is the word from the CAA: Police use of drones The Police use of drones comes under civil aviation legislation and their operators work under the same safety criteria applied to commercial permission holders. ANO Article 266 allows the CAA to exempt operators from, or to change, the normally applicable limitations. Exemptions may on occasion be granted in exceptional circumstances in the public interest and when there is no major departure from the normally-accepted level of risk. Due to their existing statutory powers, the Police already have the means to limit and control access at certain sites and events (accidents, cordons etc). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lee Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 I've just done a search on the CAA Website & a number of local Fire Authorities are listed as commercial drone operators. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keiran Arnold Posted June 23, 2017 Author Share Posted June 23, 2017 John, the document linked is effectively reproduced in the Air Accidents Investigation Branch Annual Safety Review 2016, which includes the original statement regarding recreational use. Should the AAIB not adopt the police model for drone use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Miller Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 That document was a fascinating read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 The AAIB is a small, autonomous organisation, staffed by some of the most experienced engineers and pilots on the planet. I imaging that the CAA or whover gave them dispensation not to have to have a PfCO reallises they are hardly likely to be a risk to either the public or other airspace users.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Lee Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 Posted by Keiran Arnold on 23/06/2017 13:57:35: John, the document linked is effectively reproduced in the Air Accidents Investigation Branch Annual Safety Review 2016, which includes the original statement regarding recreational use. Should the AAIB not adopt the police model for drone use? For me - No, they are not the police. They operate fully within the law & totally professionally. Nothing else is required. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devcon1 Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Kind of linked into the subject, a positive story and maybe signposts to our shores. BBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 When setting up UAV operations at the university, on advice from the CAA, we took the view that: even if a flight was for pure research purposes with no commercial aspect, the fact is that the pilot, an employee of the university, is undertaking the flight as part of their job. Therefore they are being paid for it - it therefore follows that there is indeed "valuable consideration" connected with the flight - you therefore need a permit. I think the AAIB are in the same position effectively. I'm afraid I agree with the OP's implication that they are "playing fast and loose" a bit with the regs - which is I feel very disspointing in an organisation that should be setting an example I think. Getting a Permit involves a little work - but I'm sure that its well within the capability of the AAIB! Not doing so is, I feel, rather lazy. And advertising that you haven't done so is even more questionable! BEB PS BTW, the argument that they are very experienced and so the CAA "let them off", although very charming, is not a runner I'm afraid! On that basis British Airways are very experienced so let's let them off from complying with the law of the land as well! I don't think so somehow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 "On that basis British Airways are very experienced so let's let them off from complying with the law of the land as well! I don't think so somehow!" What that ridiculous example has to do with this is a mystery to me... Does anyone on here know what discussions took place between the AAIB and the CAA? Do any AAIB operators have BMFA certificates? PPLs? ATPLs? Many of these will absolve them of the training and test anyway. The army has operators who get paid to operate small drones over war zones. They get paid to do it. Perhaps the should have a PfCO too? Do I detect a hint of jealousy creeping in here? I have a hard-earned PfCO. I also don't see the need for them to have a PfCO. As I said above, the AAIB is a small, autonomous organisation, staffed by some of the most experienced engineers and pilots on the planet. Whover gave them dispensation not to have to have a PfCO reallises they are hardly likely to be a risk to either the public or other airspace users.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted June 29, 2017 Share Posted June 29, 2017 Allow me to explain! 1. Having a Permit, if what you do is for valuable consideration, is the law. 2. If you were to "exempt" someone from the necessity to have a permit on the grounds of their experience - which was the point you made above Guvnor - then the parallel I drew is relevant. All I am saying is if you exempt AAIB on grounds of experience why not exempt others on the basis of their experience? Anyway - no one exempted them - they are claiming they fit under "recreational use" and thus don't need one! Somewhat disingenuously I think. BTW - just to be accurate, yes holding PPL's or BMFA certs etc can exempt you from the test - it does not however exempt you from the need to hold a permit. All it does it change the route you use to get there. BEB Edited By Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator on 30/06/2017 00:47:30 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Jones Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Keiran, I'm still not clear why you're grinding this particular axe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 "Anyway - no one exempted them - they are claiming they fit under "recreational use" and thus don't need one!" How do you KNOW no one exempted them??! It IS within the CAA's remit to apply exemptions. From the CAA: "The Air Navigation Order (ANO) requires operators to hold an appropriate approval or permission for certain activities and equipment. Exemptions may be applied for and granted if the CAA is satisfied that an equivalent level of safety will be assured. Holders of approvals can also apply for a variation to any current approval or permission." From the AAIB: Under UK regulations, the AAIB is not classed as a commercial operator flying for reward so can operate drones at accident sites under the standard regulations for recreational users. The AAIB operations manual lists flight limitations and training and currency requirements for our operators. Nobody here KNOWS what discussions have taken place between the CAA and the AAIB. They obviously have an ops manual and a training regime in place. I really can't see what the problem is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biggles' Elder Brother - Moderator Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 We'll obviously just have to agree to differ on this Guvnor. BEB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keiran Arnold Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 Matt, I raised this because I was taken aback by the AAIB seemingly circumventing the CAAs rules. However helpful and no matter how profession the operators are they are not flying for recreation. As a aeronautical engineering technician I find the credibility of the AAIB called into question by those actions. Which is a shame as the actual use of drones is a useful tool to have in aircraft accident investigation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 "I raised this because I was taken aback by the AAIB seemingly circumventing the CAAs rules" Are they? Have you asked them if they have had a CAA exemption? I actually think it would be a complete waste of public money to force an organisation such as the AAIB to apply for a PfCO... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keiran Arnold Posted June 30, 2017 Author Share Posted June 30, 2017 If they had an exemption then surely they would have stated that in their report. In our litigious society how would an insurance company perceive the use of the drone. I would suspect their opening gambit would be "so were you using the craft for recreational purposes " Edited By Keiran Arnold on 30/06/2017 13:47:38 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guvnor Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 Well until someone rings up and asks we'll never know!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.