They are going to have to do something about drones

[Bubbles]

Passenger jet approaching Heathrow in drone 'near-miss'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39457371

Scary.

There should be areas it is safe to fly drones, while enforcing a no drone area to protect lives.

[Nearly Sane]

Passenger jet approaching Heathrow in drone 'near-miss'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39457371

Scary.

There should be areas it is safe to fly drones, while enforcing a no drone area to protect lives.

Area?!!! You mean no drone zone surely. 

[ippy]

It's not that easy to rid ourselves of the royals Rose!

ippy

[Bubbles]

 

[floo]

I think drones should be banned they are obviously very dangerous.

[Sebastian Toe]

I think drones should be banned they are obviously very dangerous.

Not as dangerous as cars though. Should they be banned?

[Anchorman]

I think drones should be banned they are obviously very dangerous.

-
But also very useful if used properly.

[floo]

-
But also very useful if used properly.

For what exactly?

[Sebastian Toe]

For what exactly?

Reconnaissance, ariel photography, search and rescue, accessing difficult and dangerous to reach places.

[Bubbles]

I think drones should be banned they are obviously very dangerous.

Only in the wrong place, Floo.

Banning them everywhere would be OTT.

Lots of people flew small remote control planes/helicopters as a hobby without it being an issue.

Drones should be restricted only if they pose a big risk or someone invades others privacy.

[Harrowby Hall]

A problem with drones is that they can be purchased and used by people who have had no training in their use and no assessment of their ability to operate them safely.

It might even be that drones are an attractive plaything to the sort of individual who feels his masculinity is enhanced by being accompanied by a pit bull terrier on a chain.

[floo]

Reconnaissance, ariel photography, search and rescue, accessing difficult and dangerous to reach places.

Fine but they should only be used by professionals, NOT the general public, especially kids.

[Anchorman]

For what exactly?
[/quote

-
locating missing persons.
(The police are starting to use them for this, and other purposes)
Ariel surveys for agricultural, conservation and archaeological reasons.
Among other stuff.

[Sebastian Toe]

Fine but they should only be used by professionals, NOT the general public, especially kids.

Would you be happy if the operators passed some kind of test a bit like a driving test?

[Bubbles]

A problem with drones is that they can be purchased and used by people who have had no training in their use and no assessment of their ability to operate them safely.

It might even be that drones are an attractive plaything to the sort of individual who feels his masculinity is enhanced by being accompanied by a pit bull terrier on a chain.

That's a bit sexist!

No! It's very sexist! actually.

[jeremyp]

Passenger jet approaching Heathrow in drone 'near-miss'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39457371

Scary.

There should be areas it is safe to fly drones, while enforcing a no drone area to protect lives.

I'm sceptical. A drone at 10,000 feet seems more or less impossible to me.

[jeremyp]

Fine but they should only be used by professionals, NOT the general public, especially kids.

If you had your way, everything would be banned.

Did you know paedophiles use online forums. I'm surprised you are still here, it is so dangerous.

[Nearly Sane]

I'm sceptical. A drone at 10,000 feet seems more or less impossible to me.

And illegal if true, by a substantial factor

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/04/18/drone-laws-in-the-uk--what-are-the-rules/

[jeremyp]

And illegal if true, by a substantial factor

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2016/04/18/drone-laws-in-the-uk--what-are-the-rules/

Indeed, the legal limit is 400 feet.

Incidentally, 10,000 feet is 1.9 miles. A drone at that height could not have been controlled by a human on the ground, and I can't believe its battery wouldn't be flat before it got there.

[Harrowby Hall]

That's a bit sexist!

No! It's very sexist! actually.

Explain, please. How do you know that I don't keep a pit bull on a chain?

[Bubbles]

Explain, please. How do you know that I don't keep a pit bull on a chain?

It was your assumption that it's men that have an interest in flying drones.

[Bubbles]

I'm sceptical. A drone at 10,000 feet seems more or less impossible to me.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a19854/drone-flown-11000-feet/

[Harrowby Hall]

It was your assumption that it's men that have an interest in flying drones.

Where did I say that specifically men have an interest in flying drones? I did not. What I wrote was:

It might even be that drones are an attractive plaything to the sort of individual who feels his masculinity is enhanced by being accompanied by a pit bull terrier on a chain.

Now, please read that carefully and tell me how it excludes the possibility of anyone not fitting into that category from flying drones.

The assumptions are all yours, not mine.

[floo]

When it is too late and a plane crashes in the UK killing everyone on board because it has been struck by out of control drone, maybe something might be done! Until then I won't hold my breath.

[jeremyp]

When it is too late and a plane crashes in the UK killing everyone on board because it has been struck by out of control drone, maybe something might be done! Until then I won't hold my breath.

Something has been done, it's already illegal to fly a drone at over 400 feet. The next step will be to require them to be licensed because is looks like it is going to be very hard to find out who was nominally in control of this one.