EU has passed a uniform set of drone rules, paving the way for easier flight

Very disagree - In many countries it has become easier to fly your drone. Like Dre says. The only rule that was added for most drone flyers is to register the drone and get a license. If you fly a drone <250 grams registering all that's required.

In many cases places to fly have increased and in general terms is has become easier. Next to that the rules are the same now all over Europe.

I have no problems with these new rules.
There is only one thing I dislike about them. It is the fact that you have to pay for your registration year after year.

SirPalomid - Where I live I can now fly over much more areas than where I could fly before. So yes places to fly have increased. Maybe not in your country, but definately in mine.

"over-regulate everything" ....when it actually applied only one set of rules instead of 27 sets of rules (sometimes stricter, like some ppl here pointed out talking about their countries).
But I guess anti-europeans are just gonna do what they do best: ignoring facts and data, blindly believing populists proven to be on Putin's payroll.

Streeet photography should be banned.... For some - The creepy ones.

I sometimes fully understand why some people want to slam some street photographers into the face. There are some really annoying ones out there truly disregarding any privacy rules. These people are intimidating and should be taken out.

I would never take a picture of someone without their permission. I always ask FIRST! Even when it's just their pets.

I am not saying you are - I am saying some are annoying. Those are the ones ruining it for those that work discretely and whom respect the people they photograph for who they are.

A BBC drone operator would automatically have fallen under commercial use, e.g. they were getting paid for the flight (even if as part of a salary), therefore it was a commercial operation. This would mean that the pilot would absolutely have had to hold a current, valid PfCO (at the time) and suitable insurance. Getting a PfCO is not easy and has many of the same requirements for knowledge and planning as for a light aircraft.

I don't think that was likely to be a problem for a BBC drone operator though, so I suspect it was more likely to be something specific about the flight plan resulted in the denied application to use a drone, rather than simple drone paranoia. A helicopter could carry a lens with a longer focal length, enabling a more distance from specific structures on the ground, for instance, that might not have been practical for something like an Inspire or Matrice.

Yeah - and the 200mph plane might have a prop on the front while the 2kg glider doesn't. Yet, the 200mph plane safe and the glider is not, according to the dumbasses at the FAA.

“ the 200mph plane safe and the glider is not, according to the dumbasses at the FAA.”

I haven’t seen any model airplane pilots doing idiotic flights like some drone operators. My impressions of model airplane pilots are that they are professional and use common-sense. Haven’t heard of any reports of these near airports unlike drones.

FYI this article isn’t about FAA

Adrian Green, did you fail to read what he said?

"I haven’t seen any model airplane pilots doing idiotic flights like some drone operators."

Note the "...model airplane pilots..." part.

And did you know the Gatwick incident was never confirmed to have even happened? There are no pictures, no prosecutions and no confirmation of any sort.

Everyone I know in the model airplane community is extremely safe and responsible. And most of them violate FAA rules on every flight.

That's the problem - the rules have nothing to do with real safety, either for people on the ground or for full scale airplanes in the air. The rules are about compliance not safety. That's why no one feels bad about violating them. What we do is both better and safer by far.

I fly model airplanes. They are regulated the same way as "drones". They don't have autopilots or telemetry and some of them they fly *fast*. I have one plane that can climb from the ground to 400 feet in under 2 seconds. Our aerobatic competition planes generally fly patterns between 50 and 1,200 feet or so (these are FAI-specified patterns). Gliders are typically launched at 600-700 feet and use thermals to climb from there.

Some of my planes were built around 1990. I built them. Why should I have to stop flying them after an 80+year history of aviation safety by the model airplane community?

No, it's not similar. The number of model aircraft flying at any one time is still around 1 to 10 million times smaller than the number of birds flying at any one time. They are also being flown by people who understand the concept of aviation and can actively avoid full-scale airplanes. Thus, they are not a hazard to aviation and shouldn't be treated as though they are.

“Sometimes people are below and behind the hills I fly near and I can't even see them. Even if I could, knowing my position relative to them is not possible. I also fly as fast as 150mph which means this situation can change in the blink of an eye.”

That’s reassuring!

You know what's reassuring? In 80+ years, no bystander has ever been killed by a model aircraft, as far as I'm aware, and injuries have been very rare. Full-scale aircraft are even better - no injuries or deaths from models, ever.

By comparison, a few dozen kids die each year playing youth sports, just in the US.

It's a VERY safe hobby, but it's being regulated like it's playing with explosives or missiles or something.

You may not like it, but your hobby is now sold in supermarkets to anyone who puts down the money. You are becoming a minority among the uneducated.

Prepare for more regulations.

Also: All those rules are enforceable. Your freedom ends where it hits the freedom of others.

LeeJay, get it, your hobby is piloting remote controlled flying objects.

Your planes are becoming more and more a minority now to drones.

@janHalasa,

No, it is not the same. Every car has a speedometer.

This legislation is typical of the little thought process and laziness that goes into modern-day legislation making where some people write some stuff into the law and then it's the responsibility of citizens that pay them to do that poor job to sort out how to comply with things that, as in this instance, are completely impossible to comply, with unless you forgo the activity all-together.

...but, then again, maybe that is the point...