Top Ad unit 728 × 90

Latest News


Amazing Aerial Drone Video of Scarborough

Drone Video Footage of Scarborough

Stunning aerial video footage shot from a drone shows the beauty of Scarborough from above.

When amateur photographer Neil Fedorowycz contacted us to say he thought we might enjoy the latest video he had shot of Scarborough, he wasn't wrong.

Shot at sunrise in August 2015 using a DJI Phantom 3 Professional drone, the stunning footage features Scarborough Castle, harbour and both North and South bays.

Speaking exclusively to Scarborough UK Neil said:

"I am an amateur photographer when I get any spare time.  I used to live in Scarborough (about 20 years ago) and visit from time to time to see family and friends. This time I brought my drone."

"I aimed to get the sun rise over the castle, but clouds got in the way a bit. Still a lovely setting whatever the weather."

Watch Drone Video Footage of Scarborough

Amazing Aerial Drone Video of Scarborough Reviewed by Editor on 17:45:00 Rating: 5


  1. As lovely and amazing as this footage is, which it is because I think Scarborough is a wonderful place, can I take this opportunity to remind all viewers that it is in fact illegal to fly a drone over private property without having the written consent of the land owner and producing copies of your insurance and Civil Aviation License. Had the photographer been caught flying his drone over this scheduled historic monument which is owned by the Crown Estate and managed by English Heritage then he would have more than likely been prosecuted. Please remember that as brilliant as they are, drones are a serious health and safety risk and in the wrong hands pose a massive danger to not only property but to lifes as well.

  2. Very well said!
    Quite a dangerous flight over roads, cars & property in what's a built up area (or congested area in aviation terms)
    Maybe he should look at this page on that CAA website or join a model flying club!

  3. I think you should both check the regulations yourselves rather than condemning somebody else. You do not need landowners permission to fly over private property, but you do need to it take off and land on private property. Insurance is not mandatory (although it is recommended). There is no such think as a Civil Aviation Licence for drones, there is a Permission for Aerial Work that you can obtain from the CAA if you undertake flights on a commercial basis and there is no suggestion from this article that it was a commercial flight. So I suggest you check your facts before posting.

    1. Some of your facts are correct BUT Most are NOT you a confusing commercial flying Permissions PfAW with the legal flying of models under the ANO
      See here;
      I bet half of this video was not line of sight!
      Yous hould be 'in control' of the area you fly over

    2. You have no idea if this was VLOS or not, as you admit, you are just guessing.

      The BMFA is not the regulatory body the CAA is, that is where I go for the regulations and guidance.

      So how is an airline, or any other aircraft in control of the area it flies over? Drones fall under the same category. CAP 722 A10 states that;

      For SUAs, these limitations will normally include a prohibition on flight:
      - unless the permission of the landowner on whose land the SUA is intended to take off and land has been obtained.

      As I said before you only need permission to take off and land, not the intervening flight.

      Nowhere does it state that you need landowner permission to fly over private property.

    3. "As I said before you only need permission to take off and land, not the intervening flight"

      This bit is correct however it cannot be deemed a safe flight as it is too close to roads, & other public areas/property.

      You are correct you don't need permission but it has to be safe. I do understand VLOS as I have PfAW & understand the differences between Manned & Unmanned aviation (both as a hobbyist & commercially)

      Flying any R/c model in a built up (congested) area has never, & will never be seen as safe in the eyes of the CAA. The BMFA merely help provide this info, but it is all in the ANO if you actually care to read what pertains to R/C models.

      Flying manned aircraft (microlights-airliners) over congested areas is fine as it is a different part of the ANO & different regs.

    4. Here you go read this from the ANO on CAA site;
      Article 167, (Small unmanned surveillance 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.

    5. You either haven't read what I've posted or misunderstood my points, I've only commented on the original poster stating that 'is in fact illegal to fly a drone over private property without having the written consent of the land owner and producing copies of your insurance and Civil Aviation License'. All of which is incorrect.

      I have not made any assumptions of distances or whether where they were actually flying was a congested area or not. I don't have the facts about what post production editing may have taken place to crop the video to make it closer than the actual flight, clearly you have this information to make the judgements that you have made.

  4. So right. People are always trying to make trouble for new ideas. There was an outcry over hangliders when I was flying, Microlights were always hated by those who had no courage to fly them. Even now I cannot use my sand yacht on the beaches of Cornwall, even though they are empty at this time of the year, because of one death. A woman stepped over the boundary fence and was ran into by a yacht. What an outcry against the sport. Seems to me that the English are against any sport unless its football or tennis played by spitting, bullying, testicle scratching glory seekers and watched by those who cannot rise above hero worshipping someone who doesn't deserve it.

  5. Try watching this

  6. You can believe what you want, this type of flight is illegal under the ANO which is a criminal offence for the pilot.
    You don't have to believe me it's a fact. This guy was cautioned by the police for similar flying recently.

  7. Anyone care to take a look at CAA IN2014/190 Section 6, para 6.1.3 which is the current CAA document for flying SUAV in congested areas?

    Most of what is being quoted here isn't even relevant to SUAV flying.

    And as ex Derbyshire police I can assure you the police really aren't clued up on this and I'm currently in dialogue with Lincolnshire police because their guidance to officers is wrong.

    If people are going to quote rules and regs at least quote the relevant ones.

    1. I'm sorry you believe this as it is an incorrect interpretation if this IN, you need to read & understand the whole IN, not just take one paragraph out of context.

      CAA IN2014/190 Section 6, para 6.1.3 you quote deals with 'permissions' granted by the CAA over & above any general rights i.e. PfAW

      Para 6.1.2 deals with hobbyists flying any SUA with/or without a camera, & re-iterates what is written in the ANO, Article 167 WRT congested areas (i.e. not within 150m) as this is the foundation legislation


All Rights Reserved by Scarborough UK | Hyperlocal News & Events © 2014 - 2015
Powered By Blogger, Designed by Sweetheme

Contact Form


Email *

Message *

Powered by Blogger.