These have varied but back up to 2500ft so watch out – UK treats these as Class A, with the same punishment from the CAA
Still there, up to 2500ft, prohibited zones which will get you busted by the CAA 100% of the time
I saw one of the drones recovering into Lydd on Sunday. You definitely don’t want to collide with one!
arj1 wrote:
Isn’t is supposed to be the other way around? Drones have to use receiver and avoid other traffic?
Haven’t the areas been defined because the government can mandate such equipment for us but then decide it’s easier to put restrictions on us than meet their own regulations?
2500ft now – middle of here
Some of these are now up to 2000ft.
arj1 wrote:
Drones have to use receiver and avoid other traffic?
Yes! But I guess they also have to use electronic conspicuity themselves – otherwise it will be hard to tell if they’re getting dangerously close to GA aircraft.
eurogaguest1980 wrote:
Wouldn’t something like this address the requirement for ads-b out for UAVs?
Isn’t is supposed to be the other way around? Drones have to use receiver and avoid other traffic?
Wouldn’t something like this address the requirement for ads-b out for UAVs?
Malibuflyer wrote:
Most likely not! Electronic Conspicuity only works if all traffic uses the same (or at leas compatible) technology. So there will be a regulation which technology has to be used.
It will for sure be not FLARM as this is not an aviation technology. If we are lucky, it will be ADS-B. If we are a little bit less lucky, somebody will come up with a new technology because they argue that ADS-B is too heavy for small drones and we will get a requirement to equip all aircraft with that new technology.
That is not at all what EASA says. In particular, the U-Space amendment to SERA does not mention ADS-B, but only “electronic conspicuity”.
EASA arranged a very interesting workshop on U-Space and electronic conspicuity in February. This 6 minute presentation gives the basics of electronic conspicuity:
