Jump to content

Commons Science and Technology Committee Enquiry on Drones


Recommended Posts

Advert


Posted by Steve J on 13/08/2019 17:04:22:
Posted by Peter Christy on 13/08/2019 16:55:52:

The point I was trying to make is that, regardless of Brexit, we will remain an EASA member.

As things stand at the moment, the UK will cease to be a member of EASA on the 31st October.

Steve

I am not sure that this is strictly true Steve as membership of EASA is not dependent on EU Membership or even being a member of the European Free Trade Association. Turkey, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Ukraine, and Liechtenstein are also EASA members, despite not being members of either the EU or EFTA.

Edited By Piers Bowlan on 08/09/2019 06:48:21

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Membership is EASA is not dependent upon membership of the EU.

it is an agency responsible for harmonised aviation safety and practices/procedures across a geographic area. Similar to the way in which there are international standards for aircraft safety. Airport baggage check procedures and cockpit door security etc.

As with much of the EU regulations, as and when Brexit happens, deal or no deal etc etc virtually everything will stay the same.

working time limits, daytime running lights for cars and emissions etc, units of measure, light bulbs, recycling obligations etc etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As part of the planning for Brexit - Deal of some kind or No deal - the CAA and DfT have prepared a carbon copy of the EU/EASA aviation regulations, but with "CAA" substituted for "EASA" or the "Agency" where appropriate, plus some editorial tidying up to make it read properly.

When/if Brexit happens there will be new UK aviation legislation, probably alongside rather than within the ANO that will keep there rules in the UK the same as in the EU. Of course it would be simpler and easier for the UK to simply sign a treaty to be an EASA Member State like Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Leichtenstein, but the UK making agreements with the EU seems to be beyond us at present.

So, the CAA / DfT declared plan is that we stick with EU rules for aviation by either: staying in the EU; staying in EASA; or implementing UK legislation that is a carbon copy. (Delete as appropriate). Then again there will be a general election soon (or not), so the plan might change - but I doubt it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay - Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Leichtenstein are not Members of EASA as EU States are, which means they don't get a vote in the rulemaking committees. But they are bound by treaty to follow the rules and their aviation authorities issue certificates that have full validity in EU Member States, as those issued by the CAA do.

These four non-EU States are present at the the EU meetings where the wording of the rules is decided before being passed to the Parliament for adoption. They engage in the debates and give their view. Having no formal vote makes little difference as votes are rarely called in these committees. The EU Commissioners are skilled at getting consensus. I know this because used to attend some of these meetings as a CAA specialist supporting the UK DfT officials.

The point I tried to make in my post above is that we are almost guaranteed to be following EU rules for aviation by one of the following routes:

1. We will still be in the EU

2. We will join the Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, Leichtenstein group

3. The UK government will pass UK national legislation that is copied from the EU rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Jeremy Wilkins on 09/09/2019 19:01:13:

Further written evidence submission to the Select Committee by the BMFA, SAA, LMA and FPVUK Link .

Cheers,

Jeremy Wilkins

Nicely worded document there from the associations. It's a shame the anti-aviation minister and all the DfT cronies will just ignore it......

A simplified version showing the implausibility of all the drone sighting should be sent to the press. (or perhaps the associations should take out an avert in the press to get the word out to the people - to try and negate all of the bad press the hobby gets).

Edited By Jason-I on 09/09/2019 20:27:09

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

The opinion from the Defence Committee witness Arthur Holland Michel that seemed relevant to our debate was;

"The discussion that you are seeing happen about larger drones is that if the industry can prove that large drones can be integrated into the airspace in a safe way, the airspace authorities will allow that to happen."

My interpretation of that statement, trade top priority, defence?

The other thing I took from the hearing; the 'expert witnesses' know no more than us about the effectiveness of counter drone technologies as nobody shares their results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Such a provision is pointless in a model club environment where all the planes operate within a 1000ft or so of a geographical fixed point. Hopefully the results of the discussions between CAA, DfT and the national model flying bodies result in a more benign regulatory frame work with a few concessions, namely the height limit for thermal soarers( at club site).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...