Man fined for flying drone near World War Two Hurricane aircraft

A man who flew a drone close to a Hurricane aircraft while thousands of people were standing underneath has been fined £3,000.

Mark Bagguley used his drone to film Buxton Carnival despite knowing a flypast was due to take place.

The 49-year-old was also given a six-month suspended prison sentence.

Police said the pilot and people watching in the crowds below would have been killed if the drone had collided with the plane.

"Any drone in the air will pose a danger to any manned aircraft," said PC Matthew Moore, flight safety manager for the drones team at Derbyshire Police.

"We had 15,000 to 20,000 persons present at Buxton at the time. That would have caused a catastrophe in its own right."

'Priceless' aircraft

There are only 12 airworthy Hurricanes left in the world.

This one was one of two operated by the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight, based at RAF Coningsby in Lincolnshire.

"It is the last Hurricane ever built and it is considered priceless," prosecution barrister Annabel Lenton told Derby Crown Court.

Bagguley is thought to be only the second person prosecuted in the UK for flying a drone near an aircraft.

Sergej Miaun was fined in 2018 for flying his drone near a National Police Air Service (NPAS) helicopter.

Mark Bagguley was sentenced at Derby Crown Court

Neither police nor the pilot of the Hurricane knew the drone was in the sky at the time of the flypast, which was on 9 July last year.

The offences only came to light because of a member of the public, who had been photographing the Hurricane from the ground.

"To be honest, until I had got the photos on the computer I didn't know the drone were flying," said the man, who asked not to be named.

"At first it looked like a bird or something like that, and then I zoomed it in and you could see the drone."

The Hurricane was one of two operated by the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight

He reported it to the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA), which told him to contact police.

"I know all the regulations and I knew it shouldn't have been flying," he said.

"You can imagine if that drone had hit it what could have happened, it would have been a major disaster."

Police searched social media in order to find who might have been flying the drone, and found aerial images Bagguley had taken of Buxton Carnival that day.

They arrested Bagguley and seized his drone, then downloaded the flight data from it.

The flight data was overlaid with the flight path of the Hurricane, which proved Bagguley's drone had been the one near the Hurricane.

Bagguley initially denied the offences when police interviewed him.

"It was only when we started producing the pictures and the telemetry of the drone and the aircraft that he admitted what he had done," PC Moore said.

Police used the photos of the drone and Hurricane as evidence

A NOTAM (Notice to Airmen) had been issued that warned people about the flypast, and people who fly drones are meant to take notice of these.

Bagguley told police he was aware of the NOTAM after checking a drone safety app, but claimed he thought he had time to film the carnival before the Hurricane flew over.

He pleaded guilty to endangering an aircraft at a previous hearing at Chesterfield Magistrates' Court.

He also admitted operating an aircraft out of the visual line of sight, meaning he flew his drone so far away he could not see it.

A letter of apology was read out during a further hearing at Chesterfield Magistrates' Court, in which the case was committed to Derby Crown Court for sentencing.

In the letter, Bagguley said: "I owe the pilot an apology for unnecessarily putting his and other people's lives at risk that day. I can only thank God that no collision occurred."

There were thousands of people at Buxton Carnival at the time

Defence barrister Laura Broome, who represented Bagguley at Derby Crown Court, said he was "clearly very excited about the carnival" and "thought he had sufficient time to fly the drone before the flypast began".

She said Bagguley had previously checked the drone safety app, but was not able to check it shortly before the flight due to poor phone signal.

"He should have, at that point, abandoned the flight altogether," she said.

"Once the drone was in the air, upon seeing the plane, he did realise his error and did halt the drone."

She said he then "frantically" looked around and brought the drone back down to the ground.

The photographer initially thought the drone was a bird when he zoomed in

Bagguley could have been jailed for a maximum of five years.

Miss Broome told Judge Jonathan Bennett he would have lost his job as an application engineer as a result of being jailed.

This, in turn, would have caused him to lose his mortgaged house, she said.

"His mental health has taken a significant decline as a result of this process and he has reached out to Samaritans," she added.

The judge said he had only "just" concluded that the custodial sentence could be suspended.

"It was mind-blowingly reckless, particularly in the case of an intelligent, middle-aged man," he said.

"He is no youngster messing about with a new toy."

As well as being fined £3,000, Bagguley was ordered to pay costs of £450 and a victim surcharge of £154.

His six-month sentence of imprisonment was suspended for 12 months.

He was also ordered to complete 100 hours of unpaid work and will be electronically monitored with a curfew at his home address.