Jump to content

Richmond Park, new flying restrictions


Martin_K
 Share

Recommended Posts

This morning I took a DLG to The Flying Field in Richmond Park (Richmond upon Thames). New restrictions had been posted on the noticeboard, under the banners of The Royal Parks and The Metropolitan Police.

Key items (from memory);
Maximum wingspan of powered planes - 1 meter.
Height limit - 100 meters
No flying after 13:00 on weekends and Bank Holidays
FPV goggles - completely banned

I did not have a camera with me, or anything to write with, and assumed I could confirm details on the Richmond Park website. Not so, the only change I can spot in the Royal Parks Drones Policy refers to a '300ft ceiling beneath helicopter routes in London'.

A couple of summers ago I met an old boy who walked slowly out to the field carrying his 'planes and radio gear. He told me he was 90 and had been flying models in the Park since he was 10. The end of an era.

The rules did allow me to fly my DLG. (I never found much lift).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I cycled to Richmond Park today, camera in pocket. Click photo for larger image.

Until a police officer tells me otherwise I am going to assume a 2 meter electric launch glider is allowed. I went to the park office to ask but it was closed to 'protect staff from Covid-19'. On reflection, better not to get clarification in case I don't like the answer.

I would like to know who was consulted when formulating the new rules. The 'south west' line is consitent with a helpful wind direction, so shows some understanding, but I doubt anyone would want to fly a 4 meter glider when limited to maybe 200 meter range and 100 meter height. I have never seen such a large 'plane on site however.

The Flying Field is best for hand launch and belly landing, no 'strip' as such, so the fact that 1.5 meter powered trainers appear to be banned may not be a big loss.

There were no fixed wing flyers on site while I was there today but a quadcopter was buzzing overhead in the designated flying zone. The wierd thing was I scanned around looking for the pilot. As I cycled away I spotted who I think was in control, I reckon outside the 75 meter radius, head down looking at a screen while the 'drone' was in the air but not wearing a headset. It showed me just how difficult regulation is.

 

Edited to add;

The biggest issue is probably the defined flying area, much smaller than the field boundaries we used to go by.

Edited By Martin_K on 11/09/2020 14:48:38

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Presumably all those rules are held within a suitably amended byelaw? In which case they can provide a copy?

Worth checking- at Wormwood Scrubs we had issues with new "laws" that actually weren't laws being thrust upon us with great enthusiasm by the Park Constabulary until we "clarified" the current legal situation.

If they have changed the byelaws as you say they should have consulted with anyone effected by the new rules. But consultation exercises tend to be paper exercises and can easily be ignored so.....

A classic example of this would be Care Quality Commission fee consultation process that happened at work. CQC asked all the primary care providers if they wanted their fees to be increased (1) staggered over 5 years or (2) instantly. Not surprisingly 99.9% of respondents chose option (1). Having spent lots of money on "consulting" they of course went with option (2). Ridiculous. One wonders what percentage of the fee increase was to pay for the consultation exercise they promptly ignored. There really should be some rules on consultation exercises....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I'm not lawyer but some BMFA input might be of benefit here.

The Byelaws clearly state that

(13) in contravention of a notice exhibited by order of the Secretary of State, or after having been required by a constable not to do so— (a) play any game or engage in any form of sport or exercise, (b) use any kite or model aircraft or any mechanically propelled or operated model, or Royal Parks and Other Open Spaces Regulations 1997 (informal consolidated copy, as at 1 March 2015) (c) skate or otherwise go on any ice;

So are these new signs "by order of the Secretary of State"?

Of course this is likely why at the Scrubs we had the Police Constables basically bullying us by telling us to stop flying as soon as we started (even though they had no good reason to do so). You carry on flying you breach the byelaws. You stop flying even though they have no reason to ask you to stop- you lose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must admit I don't know any r/c flyers who use "Virtual Reality" headsets. Lots using FPV goggles but they're very different (as well as already being covered in the ANO).....

The above notice sounds awfully like a "please observe....." rather than "though must".

I've e-mailed them asking for clarity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Ben,

You have got me thinking about what is really a "law".

Frequently, on this forum, there are comments along the lines of, 'who is going to enforce this stuff, no officer is going to come down the lane to our field'.

Richmond Park has dedicated police officers and, as you have clearly experienced at Wormwood Scrubs, we are under scrutiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm Surprised that the snooty local residents havn't stopped flying in the park by now. I last went to Richmond park back in 1959/60 as a young boy and they were already restricting flying back then the miserable lot . Back then had to catch a bus from Clapham Junction, 37 I think , and get off at the upper Richmond Road by Sheen model that was just by the bus stop. Then had to walk up a road to the park . quite a long walk as \i recall. I hope it goes well for you all and you can keep flying .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted by Ben B on 11/09/2020 16:00:13:

I must admit I don't know any r/c flyers who use "Virtual Reality" headsets. Lots using FPV goggles but they're very different (as well as already being covered in the ANO).....

The above notice sounds awfully like a "please observe....." rather than "though must".

I've e-mailed them asking for clarity.

I agree, it looks a bit gashed together to me, and I doubt they have gone to the trouble of changing any bye-laws to make it truly enforceable. Having said that I agree with Engine Doctor that it’s surprising any flying is allowed in such a “premium postcode” , so contesting it and winning might only result in a short term victory. I’d Certainly recommend local flyers go to the BMFA for advise before approaching the Parks or the Police directly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted by Ben B on 11/09/2020 16:00:13:

............. I've e-mailed them asking for clarity.

Ben, I'm assuming you've had no reply?

I Emailed Richmond Park myself 9 days ago, specifically about electric launch gliders and a reference document for the rules. Having had no acknowledgement I phoned to confirm receipt of the Email which I got. It had been 'forwarded to Park Managers' and I should 'expect a reply by the end of the week'. That time has gone.

This afternoon as I walked to the field I met one of the regulars on his way out. He had been on site when the police visited. He asked them about motor models a few inches more than 1m wingspan and was told nobody would be measuring models as long as pilots were behaving well.

I am guessing there is no definitive document, just renewed impetus to manage activities in the park. For example, changes have also been made to road use.

So it looks like, 'keep your nose clean son', until the anticipated new national laws as set out by the UK government come to pass. (I am thinking of things like sites where 'uninvolved' people roam, proximity to 'recreational areas', and in the case of Richmond Park not disturbing wildlife).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

I saw the old board had gone and was also curious to know if rules had changed.

That they state “virtual reality” headsets suggests to me the person making those rules doesn’t understand RC as a hobby. It’s sad that the amateur drone “pilots” do appear to the spoiling it all for the regulars. The guidelines are that a headset can be used with a spotter so that rule doesn’t seem right anyway

Richmond park is a bit of a strange place unlike your well established flying areas that may have a dedicated airstrip etc.

I too have a powered glider over 1m. It’s pretty quiet and sedate so I’d be fairly confident flying it without drawing too much attention, possibly after that 1pm rule. I don’t know why that rule is there but I’m assuming it’s due to noise. I guess it could also be due to more visitors. That it states “weekends or bank holidays” does suggest it’s related to how busy the park is. I think it’s probably a blanket rule mainly to cut out the drones.

It’s reassuring that the police do appear to have the attitude that as long as you’re behaving responsibly then there’s no need to delve into the details.

To be honest, I think my favourite aircraft to fly in the park is a dlg. I have a pretty loud ducted fan jet that I always felt a bit self conscious flying.

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...