
UK to bring in drone registration - dan1234
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-40684581
======
DrNuke
I act as an advisor for DronesBench
[http://www.dronesbench.com](http://www.dronesbench.com) and we think there
should also be some sort of drone efficiency certification for the consumer
market (from 250g to about 4kg, under 250g they are toys according to EASA
legislation draft), same as other electro-mechanical devices or machines, with
a concise parameter to be sported on the drone's plate. Too much a difference
from the value declared by the vendor may imply hidden defects of the drone
and therefore the possibility of a crash. We are actively proposing our
DronesBench Index to IEEE and EASA for the legislation to come, with
encouraging response from IEEE at the preliminary level. It remains to be seen
if and how things progress in a formal way.

~~~
peteretep
I'd love to see noise regulation. Nothing more irritating than being somewhere
peaceful and beautiful when a couple of douchey drone flyers decide to ruin
the quiet

~~~
fh973
I am all for reducing noise in our environment. But you hardly hear my copters
if a car or motorcycle passes. Most AC makes more noise.

I don't understand this irrational phobia. Is the fact that it is flying
triggering some deeper mechanisms in the brain?

It reminds me of my two year old's reaction to wasps.

~~~
peteretep
Most AC isn't in secluded places of outstanding natural beauty, where drones
increasingly are.

~~~
ant6n
And many ACs break noise rules (often 40db in residential areas).

------
thinbeige
OT: Is it just me who does not see huge business opportunies in drones?

Don't get me wrong. Drones made a huge leap the recent years and from a
hardware manufacturer's POV there is business. There is also great stuff like
drone races, drone cams and selfie cam drones.

But will there be really much more? Are safety concerns, public regulation and
limited use cases in many areas (such as urban areas) giving drones a hard
time?

~~~
eterm
Drone registration could actually boost the drone-business market.

Businesses should welcome registration because people won't just look at it
and think "well I could do that myself!" because of the additional hurdle;
hurdles that businesses will happily jump through. It'll separate drones more
clearly into "toy" grade drones and business grade drones.

The businesses for drones are anywhere that you want equipment (particularly
cameras but not necessarily) that previously it was too difficult or expensive
to put a person for either due to practicality or safety reasons.

Drones are now reasonably cheap self-stabilising mobile platforms. They won't
be going away, they'll just be incorporated into other businesses where
appropriate. It's easy to laugh at drone-races and selfie-cams but as drones
become more reliable, more efficient and quieter they'll just naturally find
use cases.

~~~
mbrookes
That hurdle already exists in the UK in the form of Remotely Piloted Aircraft
Systems (RPAS) certification (AKA Remote Pilot Competence), which requires
passing a theory test, a practical test on the specific equipment that will be
flown commercially, as well as development of an Operations Manual that is
reviewed as part of the certification process. Commercial insurance is also
required.

What the proposed registration process is attempting to address is the misuse
of hobby multi-rotors.

The difficulty the it faces is in retrofitting it to an existing market. Those
who are too dumb or ignorant to fly legally (and since multi-rotors have
become too easy to acquire and fly, there are many), are going to be the ones
who also fail to register.

Requiring registration prior to purchase is one possibility, and having
mandatory geo-fencing on all new systems seems like the only way to gradually
introduce a system that restricts use in controlled airspace, and over
populated areas, but it will never be able to account for every scenario in
which people insist on breaking the law, invading privacy or putting others at
risk of injury.

------
petepete
I generally don't have a problem the idea of registration, but 250g is way too
low a limit. If 2.2kg is the FAA's lowest risk category, the limit should be
closer to that.

~~~
jahewson
It's not a limit. 250g is the _minimum_ weight at which drones are regulated.
There would be little point in a new law which excludes drones under 2.2 kg as
that is nearly all drones.

FAA is not a good example to cite either as their position on drones is a
total mess and their existing regulations are a patchwork of legacy rules
designed to cover model aircraft.

~~~
petepete
> It's not a limit. 250g is the minimum weight at which drones are regulated.

So 250g is the maximum limit for unregulated drones.

------
dTal
>The plans also include the extension of geo-fencing, in which no-fly zones
are programmed into drones using GPS co-ordinates, around areas such as
prisons and airports.

So will open source drone firmware become illegal?

~~~
WJW
Not if it includes geofencing, obviously. There might be an opportunity to
alter/delete the geofence, but that would not be different in a legal sense
from "chipping" a moped for example. The chippability of mopeds does not make
all mopeds illegal and selling properly geofenced drones with open source
firmware would also be legal. Altering a drone to remove the geofencing and
then flying it would be illegal though.

------
codebeaker
Currently mentoring a startup in this space (not in the UK). For us it's
because of mandatory insurance for 3rd party liability, and as a non-drone
owner who's seen plenty of idiots wielding them, I'm all for it.

I prefer the light touch (ala Mopeds/Scooters) where it's simple and easy,
insurance at a flat rate, easy to transfer ownership. Something akin to cars
with a v5 document, etc would be overkill.

I don't really have an opinion on the weight limits, how much does something
have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor vehicle to crash?

~~~
krona
_how much does something have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor
vehicle to crash?_

I think things should be put in to context a bit. Seaguls where I live usually
weigh more than 1-1.5Kg, and they are arguably more dangerous to be around if
you happen to be a child holding an icecream!

~~~
codebeaker
Great point, in fact I've been bird struck whilst riding a motorcycle and
that's DANGEROUS.

I dare say though that I trust the bird's self preservation instinct more than
I trust flakey wifi and an FPV pilot somewhere a few hundred meters away.

------
phatbyte
Portugal will introduce drone registration and insurance as well.

~~~
icebraining
Yeah, I'm just waiting to see how that will be enforced.

~~~
fh973
Like everywhere else, it will be irrelevant in practice. But some lawyers made
their career step.

If some people would adhere to speed limits like they praise "drone
regulations", the world would actually be safer.

------
abledon
Cant believe its taking this long... and only in the UK! these things can be
retrofitted to be _dangerous!_

~~~
wyager
I can't tell if this comment is sarcastic or not. Could you expound on this a
bit? What kind of retrofitting are you talking about, and how would
registration help? The US also has drone registration as of a year or two ago,
under the FAA. I'm not really sure what that accomplishes either, though. They
might just be gradually ramping up to more aggressive restrictions.

~~~
rhinoceraptor
The FAA registration was actually struck down (as of May 2017) for violating
the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The FAA is explicitly barred
from regulating hobby model aircraft.

Interestingly, the FAA still promulgates the notion that you have to pay them
$5 for the privilege of flying.

------
prodmerc
Could you, I don't know, require a license on high power handheld lasers? I
see imbeciles shining what looks like 100+ mW laser pens (very cheap, very
easy to get) on people.

Now, I don't like laws banning stuff, but these handheld 150-2000 mW lasers
can seriously damage someone's eyes. And I'm not going to risk _blindness or
poor eyesight for the rest of my life_ because some idiot thought it looked
cool.

What's a legitimate use for them? It seems to me that they exist only because
"high power, fuck yeah". 50mW is enough for pointing at stuff, and you need
industrial lasers to cut something.

Shining them in the sky and at people is already illegal, technically, but
this is a real case where preventing purchase would be better.

~~~
slim
And acid

~~~
sargun
What's a legitimate usage of acid? Plenty. Cooking. Engraving. Cleaning.

------
reallydattrue
License means More Tax.

Why am I not surprised?

\- Car License.

\- TV License.

\- Remember Personal Radios needed a License.

\- Gun License.

\- Travel License (passport).

Now Drone License. _sigh_

What else can the UK Government think of taxing?

~~~
IshKebab
I mean, most of those make sense - a 'car licence' (I assume you mean road
tax?) pays for roads (in theory). A TV licence pays for the BBC. A radio
licence presumably paid for the BBC before there were TVs. Passport fees pay
for embassies and other foreign services.

It is hard to see how an expensive drone licence would be justified though.

~~~
joaodlf
TV licence is a big nuisance, and to me it's just old media clinging on to the
power it holds. I go home and accidentally start streaming through the BBC
iPlayer (I wanted to watch a catch up program but my finger slipped), am I
breaking the law? Am I considered a criminal by the state?

If they want to enforce this properly they need to do it at the device level.
If I'm not supposed to watch TV then make it impossible for me not to do so,
put a login behind it or something.

Not to mention the ABSURD methods they go to intimidate you into paying, even
when you don't watch live television (in my case, I don't even own an aerial
cable), every month I get a threatening, amateur looking, in red writing,
letter telling me about my crimes and that I will just end up in court.... If
I kept these letters I'd have to rent a garage just to store them, have these
people ever heard about saving trees? :)

It's a silly tax, with silly regulations and silly enforcement that needs to
go.

~~~
orf
We have a national TV network which is an absolute national treasure and
produces some awesome TV. The TV license just ensures that the government
doesn't hold the purse strings and therefore effectively controls it. I'm
happy to pay for a TV license for this reason. Also, lots of channels with no
adverts on is pretty good.

As for the letters, _just tell them you aren 't eligible to pay_. How do they
know if you don't tell them?

For iPlayer, they are bringing in a BBC account which will be tied to your
license fee, so you can't accidentally stream it.

~~~
Fifer82
National Treasure? It is literally state media, you only had to watch the BBC
during the Scottish Indy Ref to show how far it will go to tow the government
line. I think it is a disgrace so no longer have a licence. When Trump branded
it FakeNews, people in the UK were outraged but it is one of the few things I
agree with.

~~~
orf
Is there any specific criticisms of the indy ref coverage you can give? None
of the major broadcasters where particularly unbiased, because nobody wanted
to see the union break up.

Trump brands a lot of things fake news. They rarely are.

------
madaxe_again
While I laud the intent, I doubt bad actors will register their drones, so
it'll be a burden for legitimate pilots and no deterrent whatsoever for folks
who use them to fly contraband into prison etc.

~~~
eterm
Like many laws, it's not really supposed to act as a deterrent, it's just an
easier way to administer the law.

If you find someone flying a drone dangerously, at the moment it's hard to
know where to draw the line at what is legal, which then makes it difficult to
prosecute someone who's flying drones recklessly (such as flying over
airports).

If you have drone registration, then in the same scenario you can either take
away their license (an action which doesn't require proof beyond reasonable
doubt) or if they aren't licensed, you have a very easy law to prosecute
against (flying without a license).

~~~
petre
What about model airplanes? Do you need a license to fly a model airplane or
helicopter?

~~~
madaxe_again
Not currently, no, and it's not clear if this'll extend to those.

