Grey Mavic Down

[Nigelpickin]

If one of those bloody things invaded my privacy it would get shot down. No doubt about it.

So a drone appears somewhere near your vicinity and your reaction is to go get a fire-arm and take some pot shots in an attempt to bring it down...not sure if you’ve thought this one through but let’s say you miss - there’d be some great footage of you breaking all sorts of laws. Let’s say you hit it in one, is it directly overhead or will it come down on some other poor soul with no warning - or let’s say it takes you two shots to get it, a bullet returning to ground at terminal velocity is pretty harmful.

As for PF’s view - you’ve put plenty of pictures up of other folks boats and some video that your son took of a day out at anchorage with loads of other people and boats in view - iirc. Seems to me that there a sniff of hipocracy going on here?

Of course you’re both talking nonsense and I’m not taking your comments seriously but there is good and ever improving legislation in place to protect you both and should you have a problem with invasion of your privacy relating to a drone - why not report it rather than pretending to own a Jammer or asking us to believe that you’re Billy the Kid?

 

[No Regrets]

The Swiss thing is pure drivel. You can overfly property. Inappropriate filming isn't legal anywhere in Europe, but simply overflying is fine. Thats a cheap whitewash to make yourself look less of a festering criminal, and you know it. As I said....nice to know what subhuman plantlike we are dealing with. Thanks for the heads up....

 

[Blue Sunray]

Even in the good ol' US of A they take a dim view of such red-neckish idiocy.

http://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/man-who-shot-down-drone-pleads-guilty-to-criminal-mischief/

(unless of course it is the government doing it)

 

[No Regrets]

On the subject of law breaking, the Mavic will fly up to 5km high. Illegal (like the festering moron who left threats to down every drone that enters his own 'private airspace') but even at 60-80m up which is quite within the 122m legal ceiling, at that point totally inaudible and virtually invisible. The jamming devices all fail at around 500m or 1000m if you have a particularly stupid pocket depth. Most Drones are way out of range by this time to people (both operators and 'morons with personal airspace' who don't care about the law.

I do not condone inappropriate use of drones however. People need to be respected, and that works both ways...

 

[julians]

If your drone has a camera you need to be at least 50m away from the property you are overflying.

Got to say im not comfortable with drones hovering over me. One was hovering directly over me when anchored at portals vells in majorca,im sure it wasnt filming me,but it was irritatingly noisy, and a bit disconcerting.

Nothing i coukd do about it at the time though,but i think drone operators need to be more aware of the fact that people may not appreciate a drone hovering nearby,regardless of whether its filming them or not.

 

[No Regrets]

I concur. Operators need to realistically fly within the local regs, and additionally try not to upset people or take other risks. A static building such as a Water tower to me is fair game as it's unoccupied and a 750g drone couldn't possibly harm it, even deliberately, but there are other quite legal situations which could cause issues. The problem is, ignorance exists on both sides, which is going to cause issues. I support full regulation.

 

[No Regrets]

Additionally, consumer drones cameras show fantastic detail in 4K if decent, but are very wide angle, so overflying gardens at legal height don't show any intimate detail. Not comparable to the professional range (DJI Inspire for example which has an operator and a cameraman!) or Police helicopters with perverted criminals at the helm. Those are serious cameras costing ten times more than the best consumer drones.

Ignorance is the keyword...

 

[elton]

What phone are you using? My feeling is that the app on Android has something to do with it.

I believe controlling a drone from a phone is a fundamentally flawed idea, because neither Android nor iOS is a real-time OS, so cannot be guaranteed to be in real-time control of the toy at any time. There's nothing that can be improved in the app to mitigate for this. A dedicated remote controller does run a real time OS, so will retain control reliably.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real-time_operating_system

 

[Hurricane]

Bad luck Hurricane, but welcome to the club. You have to be glass half full about it and consider it a price worth paying for the great movies you get. All easily fixed with a debit card!
I hope the SD card survived - that's usually more important than the drone itself

Thanks for your kind comments.
It hurts - especially as this morning, we moved from Espalmador to Port Roig (a small bay on Ibiza) to get away from tonight's strong winds.
We have tied back under the cliffs - 30m from the shore - very extreme anchoring.
I would love to get some drone footage.

I always offload my drone footage onto the PC after every flight so, it doesn't matter if the SD card works or not - I have copies of everything it has taken to date.

 

[Portofino]

The Swiss thing is pure drivel. You can overfly property. Inappropriate filming isn't legal anywhere in Europe, but simply overflying is fine. Thats a cheap whitewash to make yourself look less of a festering criminal, and you know it. As I said....nice to know what subhuman plantlike we are dealing with. Thanks for the heads up....

Illegal images data collection by pvt individuals is tightly controlled here we are outside the EU .
My Uk property interest s I can go on "I see " web cams and see the camera images of the outside areas .I can't do that legally here CH
https://www.edoeb.admin.ch/datenschutz/00625/00729/00738/index.html?lang=en

"other stuff " eg take a bank hol in the uk a few days before the likes of BnQ advertise gardening gadgets etc ,
Here on certain BH,s operation of strimmers /hedges cutters /lawn mowers is illegal .
This means it's nice n piece full .

It boils s down to consent in pvt space .
This is different to public space as on my u tube vid , outside CH .
In public area ,s quoted by Nigel regarding the u tube vib my son did that's as explained above .
I have no issues being photographed in the background of a kid on a donkey n Blaclpool beach .

By way of a anadotal story winter in the alps we had a set of guests and the new nieghbours too had a set of guest .
There had been rumours of paparazzi chasing one set .
It was not clear at the time which set .
1st night a drone appeared .Contray to what's been said on here you can hear the whirl before you see them .
Prob is it was dark ,night ,so we could only hear them or it .
All 4 couples where on on one site .
We went in,.thought nowt of it .
My neighbour has a Jacuzi next après ski next day we were all in that and a drone appeared agian -we heard it .
Next day off the let's call him the "principles" trots off all law abiding to to the cantonal police -explains the situation in detail .
With the shrug of shoulder s the officer suggest a jammer .

That season we dropped 3 .
No comeback .
Think about it -exactly what does the operator say to the same desk sergeant ?

Mines redundant now i n cupboard .
On the 3rd we skied down and recovered it carefully put it in a bin bag in a scenes of crime amateur ish way .
Handed it in to the police .
They lifted prints ( excluding ours ) and eventually a UK journalist was interviewd in London .No charges were pressed .
That's the kinda folk we are -we let the guy off .


Yesterday like Juilians we had a drone come with in 50 M hover over our boat in a busy bay in the SoF .
Wife was a bit disconcerted ,cos it hovered .
No idea where or who or why ?

Guess what I,am getting out of the cupboard and bringing to the boat next visit ?
Been looking at the dash for a suitable (disguised ) switch .

Absolutely got no qualms with say a Fairline 50 anniversary pre planed and assume by attending consenting 20 boat V shot etc or what ever .
Or a kid ridding a donkey on Bkackpool beach .

But you guys seem to think there no distinction between a public space and private space .
We are talking about filming Not just flying the thing .

Speak to south Yorks police helicopter unit for clarification .
You could send written messages own your drone to the cell window of the copper convicted!!

Because you can . That's the point !

On the link above LHS click on "dash cams " Then re read No regrets posts "Swiss thing -drivel ' and reconcile ---- any body ?

 

[jfm]

Guess what I,am getting out of the cupboard and bringing to the boat next visit ?
Been looking at the dash for a suitable (disguised ) switch .

Porto, in SofF, if there is a drone above your boat (say 75m altitude) and you don't know whether it is filming you (because you cannot see the camera angle), would you still down it?

I'm thinking of the scenario where someone is drone-filming their own boat, but at a sort of 30/45 degree profile shot, so that means their drone is not over their boat, and is above you. Of course you don't actually know whether the camera is pointed down at you or at 45 degrees looking at someone else, because you cant see the camera angle. Is it ok then to down it? Do you somehow have the moral right to clear the air space above your boat when anchored in a public anchorage? How big is the moral clear airspace around your boat?

 

[scubaman]

@Portofino: Would that moral airspace also give justification to wipe out memory cards from, say, gopro’s if they were being used on deck of a boat anchored next to you?

 

[Portofino]

Porto, in SofF, if there is a drone above your boat (say 75m altitude) and you don't know whether it is filming you (because you cannot see the camera angle), would you still down it?

I'm thinking of the scenario where someone is drone-filming their own boat, but at a sort of 30/45 degree profile shot, so that means their drone is not over their boat, and is above you. Of course you don't actually know whether the camera is pointed down at you or at 45 degrees looking at someone else, because you cant see the camera angle. Is it ok then to down it? Do you somehow have the moral right to clear the air space above your boat when anchored in a public anchorage? How big is the moral clear airspace around your boat?

No I would not down it here in the SoF .
I would imagine it would be pretty obvious to see what the neighbour is attempting to do .
How ever if it turned into a dailey repative nuisance ,kinda crossing the line between the Blackpool beach scenario and hovering over us ,everyday .
Then yes , on the basis of gross invasion of privacy ,only after trying to enter into dialogue with the operator with a polite request to cease .
Ideally it would be nice for the guy in your example to politely come over and explain that for about 1/2 hr ( or what ever ) they will be doing some drone shots ,laterally of his boat ,
But here in Fr ,particularly if he,s arrived 2nd and anchored over our anchor ,then turned his ghetto blaster on I some how dought the polite thing - one can hope .
@ Scubaman .
Gopros on ski helmets in Switzerland in theory could contravene the data protection laws .
By filming folks with out concent in an identifiable way .
In reality it's considered in a proportional way -- along the lines if most folks will have a helmet , glasses /goggles , scarves ,back of head shots , shadows etc --so,s not identifiable .

Boat is in the Med were i believe a differnt set of laws apply not as tightly linking data protection /cctv /consent for identfiabke images - and like the Blackpool beach scenario or great wall of China ,I,am happy to be inadvertantly picked up or the boat in this case in the back ground .
Would like to think due to range and politeness other folks would be none identifiable in a boaty scenario .

 

[scubaman]

No I would not down it here in the SoF .
I would imagine it would be pretty obvious to see what the neighbour is attempting to do .
How ever if it turned into a dailey repative nuisance ,kinda crossing the line between the Blackpool beach scenario and hovering over us ,everyday .
Then yes , on the basis of gross invasion of privacy ,only after trying to enter into dialogue with the operator with a polite request to cease .
Ideally it would be nice for the guy in your example to politely come over and explain that for about 1/2 hr ( or what ever ) they will be doing some drone shots ,laterally of his boat ,

That's quite heavy shifting of goalposts, if I may say so. Personally I wouldn't bother fitting a switch for the situation you describe. It might never come.

@ Scubaman .
Gopros on ski helmets in Switzerland in theory could contravene the data protection laws .
By filming folks with out concent in an identifiable way .
In reality it's considered in a proportional way -- along the lines if most folks will have a helmet , glasses /goggles , scarves ,back of head shots , shadows etc --so,s not identifiable .

Boat is in the Med were i believe a differnt set of laws apply not as tightly linking data protection /cctv /consent for identfiabke images - and like the Blackpool beach scenario or great wall of China ,I,am happy to be inadvertantly picked up or the boat in this case in the back ground .
Would like to think due to range and politeness other folks would be none identifiable in a boaty scenario .

A can understand that drones irritate some people, however irrational that may be. People use GoPro's, mobile phone cameras, DSLR's, camcorders, etc. all day in an anchorage without anyone getting annoyed about it. As was mentioned in another thread, a dslr with an innocent looking 300mm zoom lens can pick up amazing detail from quote far away.

For all intents and purposes, the only difference between filming an anchorage with a drone and a gopro/whatever is the height from which it's done.

As was also mentioned in another thread, the cameras on drones are quite wide angle and it's not easy to identify people from the footage. As an example, in this clip https://youtu.be/kv45rMIFOos from 1:00 onwards, the drone is at 44 meters. In the closing shots, the drone was maybe 10 meters (if that) from the boat.

Drones are new and people just haven't gotten used to them. I see them as just one more (mild) nuisance (along with jet skis, gettoblasters, wash, clanking halyards and wrong types of anchors) that we will learn to live with.

 

[Portofino]

That's quite heavy shifting of goalposts, if I may say so. Personally I wouldn't bother fitting a switch for the situation you describe. .

Nah - re read my post # 7 "property " is in the context of a building ,house ,home --in Uk bricks n mortar syntax -you are forgiven .Then re read the CH data protection link .
Did I say boat ? The other guys think they have some sort of god given right to fly (presume takes pics ) anywhere anytime .
That's what I chalanged .

Then re read my post a# 30 --- " public spaces " that's where the boat is most of the time ,

 

[Nigelpickin]

Nah - re read my post # 7 "property " is in the context of a building ,house ,home --in Uk bricks n mortar syntax -you are forgiven .Then re read the CH data protection link .
Did I say boat ? The other guys think they have some sort of god given right to fly (presume takes pics ) anywhere anytime .
That's what I chalanged .
Then re read my post a# 30 --- " public spaces " that's where the boat is most of the time ,

I guess then, that if your post number 7 did not relate to boats, boating or boaters it’s should have been made in the Lounge. PF I do find that your posts can be tricky to decipher at times, seems that if we are only talking about drones above our sticks, bricks and land then we are in broad agreement; although it’s not a phenomena about which I’m likely to have to worry, not likely to get Papped anytime soon.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

Tend to have a different set of laws in Switzerland regarding CCTV and privacy , outside officialdom -ie stuff like cameras on houses and drones .
As well as many others .
People here have a higher standard of personal privacy ,a lot less criminality to the extent cars don,t come with alarms and you don,t need to lock your door at night either .

I note on the BBC news site a policeman as been sentenced to 1y in prison for invading personal privacy --filming from a rarther bigger drone -a copter --- erh in the UK .

I,am sure if he had the subjects consent he would not be prison .
Each to there own .

All you armchair pilots (literally) may find this useful https://www.heliguy.com/blog/2016/06/14/heliguys-guide-to-global-drone-regulations/#europe-link

NATS have nice little app for the UK just incase you don;t know where Heathrow is Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=uk.co.nats.droneassist&hl=en_GB or Apple https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/nats-drone-assist-helping-you-to-fly-safely/id1172916055?mt=8 .

CAA have a dedicated page for drones https://www.caa.co.uk/Consumers/Unm...ance/Information-for-the-public-about-drones/ and then there's the privacy laws (HRA I think). Basically you can't be filmed where you can reasonably expect privacy. Back gardens, etc. are definitely out if they are screened from the public and someone lying down out of sight in a cockpit would be the same. There's even been cases brought against paparazzi using ultra long lens from hidden locations.


Like so many things in life you seem to be fine as long as you behave with common sense and decency....

 

[Portofino]

The French one,s interesting on the 1st link,top line ^^^
quote below

""Don’t use the drone’s camera to record people/vehicles without consent and never store or distribute footage without the subject’s explicit agreement"""

JFM --- would a boat be in included in the "vehicle " definition ?

@ the dronists -In my posts there's a common theme of consent which none of the dronists thus far have touched upon .

Tbh you don,t see many here in Fr filming /overflying boats
The one I saw a few dsys ago ( assuming filming ) -we were between the Lerins .
For those that don,t know a pair of islands off Cannes ,one,s a Monestry ,both have "ancient " monuments .
We were at the sw tip of the N island about 50 -70 M off a little beach ( dog paddleboard access ) .Not in the crowded middle .
A rarther nice Riva anchored near ish us next boat -elderly couple Fr flagged discretely naturist sunbathing .
Its only when they occasionally went for a dip ie got up from the cockpit otherwise you would not have known ,
There's also quite o lot of normal topless female boaters ,more so than say the beach scene here around Cannes .
I guess IN your own boat if you live here it's more discrete ,as opposed to sat on a crowded beach ?
Thinking work colleagues etc .
Any how for what ever reason they have choosen to do it IN a boat .

Up popped a drone
It was defo less than 50 M quite close 20m high .
It moved slowly between the land and the back of the boats ,there maybe was 6-7 of us essentially all close in ,4 with dogs on board .
Our dog barked at it, we heard the whirl ,we were awoken sleeping on the rear sunpad ( attired in normal swimwear ) it hovered for it seemed like ages and then moved to the next boat .
Hovered even longer over the naturist boat who were grabbing towls .
Now the thing is this .
I watched it to see where /who /locate the operator /etc ---- at 1st thinking it would be from a fellow boat owner nearby and expecting a Fr Vs Fr row to erupt .
But Nope -the clue is above "between the land " it went back over the N island skirted the W foreshore and disappeared toward the Castle .
Suspect it was operated by a tourist from the island ---basically snooping hiding in the bushes so to speak .

For those that don,t know there are two busy airports nearby NCE maybe just 15 Km ? and Mandelieu 5km ish from the W tip of the N island .

So a few Fr regulations that OG posted above broken .

The other time was actually JFM @ Cap Ferret off Paloma beach on early evening .
From memory Sept 15 we anchored to stay the pm and JFM was nearby ,he sent his drone across to our boat I signalled the thumb,s up gesture in a consenting kinda way .
He very kindly did some ariel footage ,the sea was flat the light perfect ,low sun nice shadows .
We went over in the tender later that evening -as you do -to say hello etc to a fellow formulite .

Never felt our privacy was invaded on that occasion indeed it was a consenting act --from me

There were quite a few nice boats abouts around us as well as some rarther nice properties on one side and a nice Hotel private bathing area which you can only see from the sea .

As it happened i understand there was a technical error of some sort the pictures from the flying did not come out .Not sure of the date of implimentation of the Fr drone regs ?

As I said you don,t see many drones around here -very boaty and picturesque -Azur light etc - because there seems to be regulations protecting privacy- safety re "vehicles " as well as the obvious getting it wet which is where this thread begain .

 

[scubaman]

Nah - re read my post # 7 "property " is in the context of a building ,house ,home --in Uk bricks n mortar syntax -you are forgiven .Then re read the CH data protection link .
Did I say boat ? The other guys think they have some sort of god given right to fly (presume takes pics ) anywhere anytime .
That's what I chalanged .

Then re read my post a# 30 --- " public spaces " that's where the boat is most of the time ,

I'm confused but was referring to your post #30 where you said:

Guess what I,am getting out of the cupboard and bringing to the boat next visit ?
Been looking at the dash for a suitable (disguised ) switch .

Anyway, the problems seems to be the assumed filming and automatic violation of anyones privacy who happen to be close enough to see or hear a drone. This is what I would like to challenge. On any busy day between the Lerins Islands, thousands of pics are taken (showing boats in the background, sometimes of other boats) and nobody questions peoples right to do so (nor seems to be worried about privacy or expect that anyones consent is asked).

In general, the rules regarding drones in most cases concentrate on the safe operation of the drone as an aircraft. The matters of privacy are a different thing and afaik make no distinction as to which type of eg. camera is in use.

So, every GoPro/cell phone/DSLR/camcorder/drone is subject to the same code of conduct and in my view none in itself more 'evil' than the other.

As grumpy_o_g said, it's all down to common decency and based on the few examples you gave, decency wasn't happening. Of course drones can be used wrongly, but not all drones/operators should be tarred with the same brush.

On the plus side, they can be used to capture fantastic memories and beautiful locations also for others to enjoy.

That quote from Heliguy's page regarding filming vehicles is an interesting one.

 

[Portofino]

I'm confused but was referring to your post #30 where you said:



Anyway, the problems seems to be the assumed filming and automatic violation of anyones privacy who happens to be close enough to see or hear ----

-----/--------
.

Precisely
The distinction from the drone camera ( assuming its on -most likely ) and the others. Eg phones ,SLR , go pros etc is they are fixed usually at the operater hieght say a man standing on land or stood on a building eg a castle parapet .
In a boat -stood /sat on the FB , bow , cockpit etc .
There's range to consider although I agree a paparazzi style 1m long big Dia lens could get in closer ,but generally in a public area like beach you don,t see them or on a boat .
On a boat like the Lerins I don,t expect the camera to be brought to me or raised above any normal structure on a boat deliberately to see the persons .
Both in range and hieght . The height being the one where I thought I was protected by the various structure of the boat .

Think of it as climbing a tree or wall to peep into an enclosed land structure to snap images .

I buld a Wall /fence --you simply raise your camera attached to a drone ,instead of taking a pic of the wall/fence .

Sure the drone camera technically is similiar /identical to other cameras eg go pro etc -agree ,but those are static if you like I know the approximate field /depth range to make a judgement on where to position my boat in relation to a operator behind said device .

By coming into range of your go pro ( static camera ) I kinda accept in a busy holiday area the Lerins on a boat or even just sans boat sat on a beach in Cannes ,my Bkackpool beach analogy the inevitability of being picked up in back ground holiday pics .
One can make a judgement of the risk .

As said the drone camera you can,t .

Hence the consent which I think should be required for drone images other than what would have be "image able " without a drone .

Not really bothered about data storage , or safety -air fields etc ,--not be littling those issues .
Just as you have correctly deduced the

Consent issue .

Of course they are used to capture great images ,but why not just ask identifiable folks 1st or prominent building owners .

Like I said by all means rock up in a busy anchorage kids all excited ,jet ski , seabob etc and have fun next /near to me
I would be nice to at least seek /inform the adjacent boats or property owners that for 1/2 hr or so there's gonns be a drone flying about recording the action from above , it's little johnys birthday and he got a seabob .

I can see from the operators point of view you just want some sort of voluntary code burreied away gathering dust to use drones .

Basically Cart Blanche ability to capture images that otherwise are not available on static imaging devices ,due to the camera elevation and partly the perceived ability of the operator to hide while doing this .

Representing the people who want privacy and made judgements - can you see the conflict

So legislation IMHO seems pretty strong here in Fr and of course on another level in CH

So do you or other drone operators think you should ask other boats if could overfly /get near etc to get a better camera angle of little Johney playing with his new present ?