Drones

Seems to me that whatever policy is, there should be a requirement for registration/licensing, and the devices should "squawk" their identity as aircraft do.  With the nearing roll-out of 5g mobile that should be easy enough to implement.

I'd suggest there should also be a requirement that all new drones should respond to a "stop" signal available to police which intiates a controlled descent and landing.

Please please do not add to the already noisy skies by allowing drones to fly anywhere over London.  London is a city that is never peaceful and drones are loud, disruptive visually and intrusive. 

The London police force is under pressure and is unable to cope at present with many issues due to lack of funds and staff.  Who would police the skies and ensure drones have no cameras on board, that their noise levels are those set by law, that they fly the least invasive routes.  And would these routes be along people's back gardens destroying whatever privacy is left to us living as we do in a highly populated city.

I do not want  Amazon or any other company to use drones to deliver parcels in London. Public transport is good and Amazon uses shops that open late to allow people to collect their parcels easily.  It is a noisy solution for such deliveries in such a well connected city.  And if the parcel cannot be delivered will the drone leave a message to say where the parcel was delivered ie with a neighbour as happens now.  I think not.

NO DRONES AT ALL over London skies is my view unless they are used where NO other solution can be found.

They are like ginormous mosquitoes. I would not want one to land on my head. Nor do I like to go to a lovely nature park and see/hear them flying overhead. I think they should not be allowed to be used in residential areas or nature reserves. Keep them for the limited professional uses, not deliving everyone's Amazon parcels.

The use of drones in London should be permitted but strictly regulated as there are so many sesitive areas in London. Deliveries by drones could be a partial solution to cope with congested traffic. They need to be registered and licensed and monitored. Privacy, terrorism are only two sensitive areas to be looked into.

I dont really know much about drones but I think there needs to be more awareness of the dangers posed by drones by those who are flying them; there needs to be better regulations for all things drone and should definitely not be allowed to be flown in built up urban areas  

Ban all private use drones

Anyone wish to fly these should take a course and be licensed 

If drones are used for official purposes such as police or rescue organisations that's ok but private use should be severely limited 

If not used properly, drones are potentially as dangerous as badly driven motor vehicles!

As such, drones should NOT be generally available for use by the general public.

There are occasions when drones may be of use, but these must be strictly controlled.  As a general rule, drones should only be used when there is no other way of achieving the required outcome.  As such, they should NOT be used for general deliveries.  No Amazons or Deliveroos or general parcel or letter deliveries for example!

The main uses I would envisage for drones would include the delivery of emergency medical supplies, for essential police and security surveillance in respect of crime prevention or investigation, aerial filming for TV or film production, archeological and historical research, or in providing aerial shots for planning architectural purposes.

All drones being used should be properly licenced and registered (perhaps paying a fee), and every drone operation should be properly authorised - an appropriate regulatory body would need to be established in order to carry out this authorisation function.  In respect of police and security surveillance, authorisation may need to be part of the judicial process (i.e. akin to warrants).  Suffice to say, an operation may be refused by the authorising authority.  

In all cases, the drone operator would need to complete a risk assessement prior to any operation.

The authorising authority should also be available for public complaints in respect of drone use, and could have the power to revoke an operating licence.

I would also expect that any drone operator would have to be covered by third party liability insurance in case of a drone causing damage to property or injury to an individual.

It may also be appropriate for anyone operating a drone to have undertaken a training course.

THAT'S IT - SORRY FOR DRONING ON!

The only private uses for drones in London are snooping and drug delivery. Ban private ownership.

It seems many here are in agreement. Emergency services, special projects (building inspections etc) and one-off surveys for the public domain all seem acceptable by most. There is also a sizeable minority of hobbyists who would like somewhere to do their thing. 

The issues against the use of drones which need taking into account are noise pollution, invasion of privacy, and illegal activities (drug deliveries etc). 

I was at a private wedding celebration where a drone ‘shadowed’ the whole procession, coming in very low and generally being noisy and invasive. It was very unpleasant, also upsetting for the bridal couple & family, who had employed fabulous musicians to accompany them, only to be drowned out by engine noise. It made me wonder what the legal position would be if someone ‘downed’ it, or disabled it.....

as a London resident, I would only be supportive of their general use if they were INSTEAD of helicopters, which are terrifically noisy, and hang around more than planes do.

I think drones in London and elsewhere should be licensed and strictly regulated. The potential noise nuisance is immense. Helicopters are already a nuisance as well as planes. They should certainly not be allowed for private deliveries. Any use should have to demonstrate a clear public benefit for all.

One word: Gatwick!!

I agree with Mike and Ben.  Have we not already got way too much surveilance/spying going on.  Noise?  How many Londoners surveyed would say 'yes' to be able to hear aircraft over their home?  More money spent on bobby's on the ground would help with employment, social interaction and community liaison let alone reducing crime rate and making people feel more secure.  Aside from this, I am very much into the environment/conservation.  What are the impacts to birdlife?

I'm all for conscientious development but I think there is a need to tread carefully.  How much research has been done on this so far?  Have thee been any discussion groups, public consultation or forums on this issue to date?

/

OK for emergency services but in densely populated areas like London very strict regulation essential.

In addition to my other comments, I also agree with Mike Solomons below.

PROS

For security forces and police operational reasons.  Also for fire brigade and live traffic monitoring.

CONS

Huge invasion of privacy, terrorism threat, not acceptable for use by private individuals.  Nor companies beyond the above which includes film companies, delivery companies etc.  Would accept them being used for building surveys, provided their flight and photos were limited strictly to the site in question, and did not "bleed" over into neighbouring properties.  

I am against them being used for commercial or personal use.  Otherwise for emergencies and authorised public services have no objection provided they are "policed" properly.