UK The dreaded "congested area"

[simon@DEF]

You'd still have to prove the mitigated risk, at 51 mtrs above a person can you ensure fully their safety...
In mid October we may find out more once the new information is released from the CAA.

 

[LOVELY]

Thank you, this thread was very helpful! I have a 30m radius clear for take-off/landing in Central London to do a roof top inspection; simply straight up and down and this has confirmed my calculations that this can be done. A very useful tool is www.flightradar24.com and along with some Observers/Spotters you can keep guard on any incursions. Great forum!

 

[NickOfLeeds]

I would say you should be fine providing:

• You are only flying a sub 7kg aircraft
• You have 30m clearance during take off or landing
• You maintain a 50m clearance at all times be that vertical or lateral from any structure, vessel, person etc not under your control.

IN-2014/184 basically relaxes the standard permissions for small mass SUA's and operation within a congested area and absolves the operator of the need to file a CAOSC.

I realise that this post is getting on a bit but the rules that it refers to appear to still be current.
I was pleased to read your conversation as it reinforced my understanding but something was niggling at me, so I pulled our my PfAW and discovered that the item 2-e
includes the term 'directly overhead' and wondered if my PfAW includes new wording to prevent over-flying.
Any thoughts?

 

[NickOfLeeds]

Thank you, this thread was very helpful! I have a 30m radius clear for take-off/landing in Central London to do a roof top inspection; simply straight up and down and this has confirmed my calculations that this can be done. A very useful tool is www.flightradar24.com and along with some Observers/Spotters you can keep guard on any incursions. Great forum!

flightradar24 doesn't include military aircraft, I'm based in the Vale of York AIAA so I prefer http://global.adsbexchange.com/VirtualRadar/desktop.html#

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

I realise that this post is getting on a bit but the rules that it refers to appear to still be current.
I was pleased to read your conversation as it reinforced my understanding but something was niggling at me, so I pulled our my PfAW and discovered that the item 2-e
includes the term 'directly overhead' and wondered if my PfAW includes new wording to prevent over-flying.
Any thoughts?

Interesting???

My PFAW 2016, issued 3 weeks ago does NOT have the word "overhead" anywhere in article 2-e...when was your PFAW issued???

 

[The Editor]

I realise that this post is getting on a bit but the rules that it refers to appear to still be current.
I was pleased to read your conversation as it reinforced my understanding but something was niggling at me, so I pulled our my PfAW and discovered that the item 2-e
includes the term 'directly overhead' and wondered if my PfAW includes new wording to prevent over-flying.
Any thoughts?

Hi Nick, I think this has been clarified now (directly from the CAA - although I will have to dig up the quote) as basically treating the 50m as a 'bubble' so as long as you quite rightly say you do not fly directly overhead you can maintain your standoff vertically or laterally.

Doing some good old high school maths, this means that you can fly at 49m agl and only be 1m laterally away from a person, vessel, vehicle, structure etc.
The lateral distance increases quite dramatically the lower you fly until obviously once you are circa 1m off the deck then you should be 50m away from anyone/thing not under your control.

I think the two important points are:

• You are not permitted directly overhead of anything not in your control
• Think of the 50m rule as a 'bubble'

Apologies for any confusion

 

[NickOfLeeds]

6 July 2016

 

[The Editor]

Interesting???

My PFAW 2016, issued 3 weeks ago does NOT have the word "overhead" anywhere in article 2-e...when was your PFAW issued???

Are you sure?

Under 'Permission', Section 2. 'Operational Conditions for all Classes:' paragraph 'e'

"directly overhead or within 50 meters of any person, vessel, vehicle...........etc"

 

[The Editor]

Mine was renewed 18th August 2016 and I have 2 (e) in there - They REALLY do not want anyone flying directly overhead!

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

Hi Nick, I think this has been clarified now (directly from the CAA - although I will have to dig up the quote) as basically treating the 50m as a 'bubble' so as long as you quite rightly say you do not fly directly overhead you can maintain your standoff vertically or laterally.

Doing some good old high school maths, this means that you can fly at 49m agl and only be 1m laterally away from a person, vessel, vehicle, structure etc.
The lateral distance increases quite dramatically the lower you fly until obviously once you are circa 1m off the deck then you should be 50m away from anyone/thing not under your control.

I think the two important points are:

• You are not permitted directly overhead of anything not in your control
• Think of the 50m rule as a 'bubble'

Apologies for any confusion

So hang on......I thought this was clear, but not anymore (classic!)

So you can't set yourself at 51m all and go for a cruise over a village (for example) unless your flight path does not go over any house (good luck achieving that!).....

Here is a screen grab of my PFAW......ummm in a sec!

 

[The Editor]

So you can't set yourself at 51m all and go for a cruise over a village (for example) unless your flight path does not go over any house

Correct!

You can however get to within 1m laterally (but not directly overhead) from said object/house so long as you maintain >49m agl

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

Here you go - what am I missing???

 

[NickOfLeeds]

Hi Nick, I think this has been clarified now (directly from the CAA - although I will have to dig up the quote) as basically treating the 50m as a 'bubble' so as long as you quite rightly say you do not fly directly overhead you can maintain your standoff vertically or laterally.

Doing some good old high school maths, this means that you can fly at 49m agl and only be 1m laterally away from a person, vessel, vehicle, structure etc.
The lateral distance increases quite dramatically the lower you fly until obviously once you are circa 1m off the deck then you should be 50m away from anyone/thing not under your control.

I think the two important points are:

• You are not permitted directly overhead of anything not in your control
• Think of the 50m rule as a 'bubble'

Apologies for any confusion

I was told during ground school to use the concept of a 50m radius bubble, but I must confess that I remain a little confused!
IE. If the aircraft is flying at say 80m agl, leaving 30m distance between the bottom of this virtual bubble and the ground (and a little less for buildings etc) then the aircraft is more than 50m away from everything.
If flying at that altitude still prevents me from flying over things that are NOT under my control then we are still using a cylinder albeit a bit smaller than 50m, rendering the bubble concept is misleading and flawed.
Or am I wrong?

 

[The Editor]

Here you go - what am I missing???

View attachment 10284

Classic - looks like they have changed it (again) in the last few weeks then

I wonder if this is in conjunction with the amended/new ANO and therefore all renewals will now have the word 'over' omitted from the PfCO's ?

Of course, this doesn't absolve anyone from not following the 25th August amended ANO

 

[NickOfLeeds]

Here you go - what am I missing???

View attachment 10284

 

[The Editor]

I was told during ground school to use the concept of a 50m radius bubble, but I must confess that I remain a little confused!
IE. If the aircraft is flying at say 80m agl, leaving 30m distance between the bottom of this virtual bubble and the ground (and a little less for buildings etc) then the aircraft is more than 50m away from everything.
If flying at that altitude still prevents me from flying over things that are NOT under my control then we are still using a cylinder albeit a bit smaller than 50m, rendering the bubble concept is misleading and flawed.
Or am I wrong?

OK,
It appears 'OVER' has been removed from article 95 for sub 7kg aircraft!

(1) The person in charge of a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not fly the
aircraft in any of the circumstances described in paragraph (2) except in
accordance with a permission issued by the CAA.

(2) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (1) are:


(a) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;

(b) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than
1,000 persons;

(c) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the
control of the person in charge of the aircraft;
or
(d) subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), within 50 metres of any person.


(3) Subject to paragraph (4), during take-off or landing, a small unmanned
surveillance aircraft must not be flown within 30 metres of any person.


(4) Paragraphs (2)(d) and (3) do not apply to the person in charge of the small
unmanned surveillance aircraft or a person under the control of the person in
charge of the aircraft.

(5) In this article 'a small unmanned surveillance aircraft' means a small unmanned
aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data
acquisition.

This is interesting as there will now be a disparity (and a commercial advantage) for PfCO's issued after the new ANO if 'OVER' has now been purposely removed!

NOPE - Correction....Congested area is still there so same rules stand.

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

Classic - looks like they have changed it (again) in the last few weeks then

I wonder if this is in conjunction with the amended/new ANO and therefore all renewals will now have the word 'over' omitted from the PfCO's ?

Of course, this doesn't absolve anyone from not following the 25th August amended ANO

Phew! So I'm not going mad, you have no idea how many times I read and re-read that section, just to make sure!

So even though it doesn't say I can't fly overhead....I still can't because of an ANO.......I need to find this!

Why doesn't the CAA just email us all when operating rules are updated......would make life a lot safer!

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

Oh yes, of course! I am sub 7kg.....so I can fly overhead!


Brain hurts......

 

[The Editor]

OK - have to pop out for 30mins...... will revisit this one.

 

[Wing Commander Smyth]

Right - i'm gonna say it (deep breath) .... I can not see any sentence or circumstance described in my PFAW (Sept 2016) that says I can not fly directly overhead of things outside of my control, including congested areas, as long as I am 50m minimum away at any point.

My 2 (a) is also different to what you posted @The Editor - which would have stopped me! My 2 (a) has no reference to "the dreaded" congested area at all!

That article (exact same wording) has now moved to the section referring to aircraft over 7KG and under 20kg.

So my interpretation is, if you're sub 7kg, you can take off 30m from things outside of your control, with land owners permission of course,......and fly anywhere outside of restricted areas as long as you stay 50m minimum at all times away from anything not in your control.

Its at this point one of you will add...."ah, but your forgetting about this special little document here" .... right???