We are pleased to report that since this show aired, the CAA have now updated the version number. A small step, although they are still happy to cover up their error, as the revision comment is still blank.
I've questioned from day 1, are the CAA actually fit for regulating something they know very little about?🤔 I remember early on when they got involved with regulating UAVs, they actually REDUCED the min distance you could fly from an airport to 1km⚠️😲😳 when it was already 4 or 5km at the time.... Not exactly confidence inspiring. 😳😲
This just isn’t good enough. Just further proof that the CAA are not doing their job and are not fit for purpose. This is a regulatory body that deals with a serious and potentially dangerous industry, aviation, forget about drones for a minute, the CAA regulate manned aircraft, large aircraft, with the potential for a lot of damage and loss of life if something goes wrong. They need audited or investigated because if they are not following procedure and getting it so wrong on a publicly available document what are their internal processes and documents like? Did they even acknowledge the change or did they just quietly change the number?
You could imagine The Importance put on diversity hire and woke culture which take president over any form of safety protocol and as for the revision numbers these can be fluid just like the pronouns of the staff.. collapse of the institutions.
Sorry, but you are bringing a totally irrelevant topic into this. What evidence do you have that any recruitment process has impacted the CAA? I have met and know many people in the organisation, and I can assure you this isn't down to the majority of employees. This is a breakdown of process requiring work from the management. Not everything is an excuse to pop off your political views.
Do we actually believe the 10,000 OSC/SOCA figure in the first place. It seems very high as I know lots of commercial drone operators and only a very small percentage ever had a OSC. Also, the main reason operators wanted a OSC/SOCA was for 1. Reduced limitation of distances 2. Flying higher than 400ft. For the first, the sub 250g has made a big difference. The Mini3/4’s have sufficient quality for many of the uses, so why go through the cost and pain of getting a SOCA. Likewise, many solo drone operators say they can survive with sub 250g drones the provisions of A2CofC for larger drones. It would be interesting to know the breakdown between A2CofC and GVC holders, rather than grouping together. This will provide a good insight into changes within the SME drone operators.
Why do the CAA think they can ignore their own rules? Because they are in complete control, that's why. Henry VIII could execute whosoever he felt like - long time ago, very different circumstances, but same principle. Lord Acton left a useful saying on that.
question if a cap document is used to prosicute someone and there changing the contents at will with no accountability how would that affect any case in law?
Hey James! CAP documents sit below legislation and are the CAA advice and guidance to interpret the law. When in court, it would be the legislation alone you are charged with.
Hi, great content thank you. Unrelated question to this video - i live in the UK and have a sub 250g drone with Operator ID. I am visiting Spain soon - am i covered by my UK Operator ID or do i need to register for Spain with EASA ? Do you have a video on this?
Thanks for the kind feedback! Yes, you do need to repeat the registration process in EASA region. Here is a video that might help: ruclips.net/video/ahz-NdmEzBc/видео.htmlsi=7GGecX6pgChTJa3G
We are pleased to report that since this show aired, the CAA have now updated the version number. A small step, although they are still happy to cover up their error, as the revision comment is still blank.
I've questioned from day 1, are the CAA actually fit for regulating something they know very little about?🤔
I remember early on when they got involved with regulating UAVs, they actually REDUCED the min distance you could fly from an airport to 1km⚠️😲😳 when it was already 4 or 5km at the time....
Not exactly confidence inspiring. 😳😲
CAA, drone and competent, words unlikely to ever appear together.
Not fit for purpose is exactly right.
This just isn’t good enough. Just further proof that the CAA are not doing their job and are not fit for purpose.
This is a regulatory body that deals with a serious and potentially dangerous industry, aviation, forget about drones for a minute, the CAA regulate manned aircraft, large aircraft, with the potential for a lot of damage and loss of life if something goes wrong. They need audited or investigated because if they are not following procedure and getting it so wrong on a publicly available document what are their internal processes and documents like?
Did they even acknowledge the change or did they just quietly change the number?
You could imagine The Importance put on diversity hire and woke culture which take president over any form of safety protocol and as for the revision numbers these can be fluid just like the pronouns of the staff.. collapse of the institutions.
Sorry, but you are bringing a totally irrelevant topic into this. What evidence do you have that any recruitment process has impacted the CAA? I have met and know many people in the organisation, and I can assure you this isn't down to the majority of employees. This is a breakdown of process requiring work from the management.
Not everything is an excuse to pop off your political views.
I hear you.
@@Geeksvana incompetence is everywhere and funnily enough diversity is the problem. Not political just fact.
Thanks Sean for advise on getting easa license 👍
You are welcome! Have a great time!!
Do we actually believe the 10,000 OSC/SOCA figure in the first place. It seems very high as I know lots of commercial drone operators and only a very small percentage ever had a OSC. Also, the main reason operators wanted a OSC/SOCA was for 1. Reduced limitation of distances 2. Flying higher than 400ft. For the first, the sub 250g has made a big difference. The Mini3/4’s have sufficient quality for many of the uses, so why go through the cost and pain of getting a SOCA. Likewise, many solo drone operators say they can survive with sub 250g drones the provisions of A2CofC for larger drones. It would be interesting to know the breakdown between A2CofC and GVC holders, rather than grouping together. This will provide a good insight into changes within the SME drone operators.
Why do the CAA think they can ignore their own rules? Because they are in complete control, that's why. Henry VIII could execute whosoever he felt like - long time ago, very different circumstances, but same principle. Lord Acton left a useful saying on that.
question if a cap document is used to prosicute someone and there changing the contents at will with no accountability how would that affect any case in law?
Hey James! CAP documents sit below legislation and are the CAA advice and guidance to interpret the law. When in court, it would be the legislation alone you are charged with.
@@Geeksvana hopefully thats not as bug ridden as caa`s work "unless it works in our favour "
Just as Xjet always said...............
Hi, great content thank you. Unrelated question to this video - i live in the UK and have a sub 250g drone with Operator ID. I am visiting Spain soon - am i covered by my UK Operator ID or do i need to register for Spain with EASA ? Do you have a video on this?
Thanks for the kind feedback! Yes, you do need to repeat the registration process in EASA region. Here is a video that might help: ruclips.net/video/ahz-NdmEzBc/видео.htmlsi=7GGecX6pgChTJa3G
@@Geeksvana Perfect thanks for the quick and helpful response 👍
Yeah RUclips forgot to mention a livestream
can a normal mortal go to dronex or is it industry only?
The CAA gone Rogue. 🙈🙉🙊
credit the caa with all errors, spelling goofs and general blunders