Stricter Rules for Drone Ownership?

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by pylon

My Phantom 3 professional has mind blowing range out of the box. I am easily getting 2 kms, and could stretch it farther if I really wanted to. Plus its throwing a 720p signal back to the ipad. You could thread a needle with it, flying FPV. I shouldn't admit this, but I flew mine from the top of the hill by Crescent heights High school, manually landed it on the roof of the Bow, took off again and flew it home. Now with ground sonar and visual collision sensors, you can do it. You just point the camera straight down. The only limitation on range seems to be battery power. But at about 30 mph, you can cover some pretty good range with a 25 min flight time.

I'll be honest, as an owner and enthusiast, they even scare me, because I am fully aware of what they are capable of, especially with how easy they are to fly. It is only a matter of time before some straps something bad to one, and does something horrible.

Wouldn't this be straight up illegal? Like terribly illegal?

[calumniate]

Yeah, let's fly something almost out of range thirty stories up over a densely populated area. Nice

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by stazzy33

I would remove this for sure. That is super dangerous, any disconnection between receiver and transmitter or the battery going and you'd do some serious damage to whoever was below.

uhhhhh not likely, these drones aren't like old RC planes which became dumb missiles if you lost contact with them. In the event of low battery or loss of connection with the remote, the drone Pylon has automatically returns to the point of takeoff and lands itself safely. So no you're not going to have drones falling out of the sky.

Not to suggest what Pylon did was legal or smart but lets get the fear mongering out of the way here. The risk to joe blow on the ground here was zero.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by jayswin

Wouldn't this be straight up illegal? Like terribly illegal?

To be honest, I don't think it is. I fly it up and down the river quite often and over princess island park quite often. However, I didn't even know about the helipad. And that is a good point. It was just a spur of the moment thing, I was flying and was curious if it would reach. It probably wasn't too smart, but I don't think I broke any laws.

However, the craft has a built in safety system, that restricts flight in restricted airspace, and automatically lands you or returns to home if you are violating any rules. It wont even take off within a KM of the Airport. And is restricted to 400 feet within 1.6 kms I believe.

As far as loss of transmission goes, the second they lose signal, they return to take-off point automatically. It will even caculate range/power and will return home once they are out of sufficient power to make it back. And I have that at a very liberal setting, it will come back @ 40% batt. power.

And far as flying them over populated areas there honestly, there is no guidelines in place as far as I have ever read.

[stazzy33]

Originally Posted by Dan02

uhhhhh not likely, these drones aren't like old RC planes which became dumb missiles if you lost contact with them. In the event of low battery or loss of connection with the remote, the drone Pylon has automatically returns to the point of takeoff and lands itself safely. So no you're not going to have drones falling out of the sky.

Not to suggest what Pylon did was legal or smart but lets get the fear mongering out of the way here. The risk to joe blow on the ground here was zero.

Yeah, I bet that's what the guy filming the skiers thought too...

It's not fear mongering, because drones <$2000 (unlike Pylon's) don't have those capabilities. And even in this case, had there been a miscalculation and the drone hit, say a window washer cable, and broke a prop, it would be in pieces all over 5th ave.

[pylon]

Originally Posted by stazzy33

Yeah, I bet that's what the guy filming the skiers thought too...

It's not fear mongering, because drones <$2000 (unlike Pylon's) don't have those capabilities. And even in this case, had there been a miscalculation and the drone hit, say a window washer cable, and broke a prop, it would be in pieces all over 5th ave.

And this I agree with. Flying a $200 piece of junk off a deal site, and what I am flying are quite different. The amount of safety checks DJI has built in, is quite impressive.

[stazzy33]

Originally Posted by pylon

And this I agree with. Flying a $200 piece of junk off a deal site, and what I am flying are quite different. The amount of safety checks DJI has built in, is quite impressive.

Oh I don't disagree with that, but ultimately you are responsible for your aircraft. If for some reason it were to fall out of the sky and injure someone or damage their property you would be personally liable.

Here is some good information: https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviati...-600-2135.html

Also, think about getting a MAAC membership. They provide you with liability insurance given you are flying at a designated MAAC field, there are several around Calgary. http://www.maac.ca/en/

The big issue around this is lack of regulation, but it's always the best to err on the side of caution in these situations.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by pylon

And this I agree with. Flying a $200 piece of junk off a deal site, and what I am flying are quite different. The amount of safety checks DJI has built in, is quite impressive.

Yet all those fancy safety checks weren't aware that you were flying well within an exclusion zone for an active helipad. To say nothing of the very real possibility that you were getting into altitudes that quite often helicopters such as HAWC's, STARS, and even the traffic choppers utilize.

[polak]

I remember how hard it was to fly the RC plane I got from my parents as a kid. I don't think it stayed in the air for more than a minute in the time I owned it, to the time I finally crashed it so hard it was in pieces.

These drones look super easy by comparison.

[Fuzz]

Ya, I fly RC planes and they require a lot of skill and practice. I'm not sure making something so easy to use, and potentially dangerous is a good thing. I understand their are lots of safety features on these drones, but there are also many things that could go catastrophically wrong.

[pylon]

I do not disagree with almost everything being said in this thread. How easy it is to get into this stuff is a little disconcerting. However. myself, I have been flying them for about 4 years now, and I am a pretty skilled pilot, and know the operating systems inside out. I know all the safety checks required. I inspect props, test my motors, etc... basically do a little overhaul every few flights. I always replace my props if I have a tip over on landing and graze the ground, regardless of damage. Most pilots wont, and that is a problem.

However, I will fully admit, I am not a legal expert on NAV Canada regulations. And that is the problem. And I am part of that problem. You can buy these sophisticated devices that a decade ago, military agencies would pay millions of dollars a copy for shooting 4k video. And any butt head with a 5000k room on his credit card can be in the air in 15 minutes, with next to no clue of how to operate it or what safety checks to follow. So it is kinda a catch 22. You can buy this totally awesome , super high end toy, and you want to use the hell out of it, but should you be able to? Once they are no longer legal, or require special licensing, then I will adapt, or ground it. But as a hobbyist, just clowning around, there are very few restrictions in place.

Myself, I actually believe they should have a special license in place to fly them. And I would have no issues going through the steps.

[Frequitude]

Yes please. Ban them within city limits. They're annoying to listen to, a privacy issue, and a potential hazard.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Yet all those fancy safety checks weren't aware that you were flying well within an exclusion zone for an active helipad. To say nothing of the very real possibility that you were getting into altitudes that quite often helicopters such as HAWC's, STARS, and even the traffic choppers utilize.

http://www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/...y_EN_Front.pdf

Or that the drone was higher than 90m. Or within 150m of people, vehicles, and buildings.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Dan02

uhhhhh not likely, these drones aren't like old RC planes which became dumb missiles if you lost contact with them. In the event of low battery or loss of connection with the remote, the drone Pylon has automatically returns to the point of takeoff and lands itself safely. So no you're not going to have drones falling out of the sky.

Not to suggest what Pylon did was legal or smart but lets get the fear mongering out of the way here. The risk to joe blow on the ground here was zero.

That assumes no hardware failures, no pilot error and that everyone has a drone capable of doing what you describe, none of which are reasonable assumptions.

A drone almost took out a top skier the other day, took out this baby's eye (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-h...ester-34936739), and there's a long list of people being injured by drones or drones causing other damage.

It's not fear mongering to say the risk was not zero.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by photon

That assumes no hardware failures, no pilot error and that everyone has a drone capable of doing what you describe, none of which are reasonable assumptions.

A drone almost took out a top skier the other day, took out this baby's eye (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-h...ester-34936739), and there's a long list of people being injured by drones or drones causing other damage.

It's not fear mongering to say the risk was not zero.

for sure accidents can happen, over a million people are going to die on the roads this year, yet you don't give a second thought to getting in your car every day. Heck Legos have killed over 50 people, but I've yet to hear about a falling drone killing anyone, though it may have happened.

Drone are way to useful not to be very common in our future, so we need effective and realistic regulations for them that maximizes public safety while at the same time realizing #### does happen from time to time and banning them from flying over anyone is not a realistic solution.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Dan02

for sure accidents can happen, over a million people are going to die on the roads this year, yet you don't give a second thought to getting in your car every day. Heck Legos have killed over 50 people, but I've yet to hear about a falling drone killing anyone, though it may have happened.

Drone are way to useful not to be very common in our future, so we need effective and realistic regulations for them that maximizes public safety while at the same time realizing #### does happen from time to time and banning them from flying over anyone is not a realistic solution.

Exactly, no one is saying getting rid of drones, they just have to be controlled. People drive cars but everyone is licensed and has at least a bit of training. Flying a drone is harder than driving a car and it's only 2 dimensional, if someone is going to be flying a drone over the public or where it could do harm they should be licensed, and maybe even have a website were you have to file a flight plan.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by photon

Exactly, no one is saying getting rid of drones, they just have to be controlled. People drive cars but everyone is licensed and has at least a bit of training. Flying a drone is harder than driving a car and it's only 2 dimensional, if someone is going to be flying a drone over the public or where it could do harm they should be licensed, and maybe even have a website were you have to file a flight plan.

Sorry, but you sound like my mom. Basing everything they know about "drones" from every terrible sensationalist news piece.

I have been flying RC plans and copters from over a decade now, and besides magically changing names from "R/C" to "drone", they have become way easier, safer, and more "foolproof" for the general public.

Look at the size and weight specs for a typical DJI quadcopter. Most/all consumer level ones are small and the potential for lethal damage is minuscule to microscopic. Comparing it to the dangers of driving a car are ridiculous.

File a flight plan for my 2lbs RC quadcopter? Are you serious? I can get behind stricter rules for large commercial quadcopters (like the one from OP post that carry a full size camera rig), but 99.9% of hobbyists are flying rinky dink electric quadcopters.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Sorry, but you sound like my mom. Basing everything they know about "drones" from every terrible sensationalist news piece.

I have been flying RC plans and copters from over a decade now, and besides magically changing names from "R/C" to "drone", they have become way easier, safer, and more "foolproof" for the general public.

Look at the size and weight specs for a typical DJI quadcopter. Most/all consumer level ones are small and the potential for lethal damage is minuscule to microscopic. Comparing it to the dangers of driving a car are ridiculous.

File a flight plan for my 2lbs RC quadcopter? Are you serious? I can get behind stricter rules for large commercial quadcopters (like the one from OP post that carry a full size camera rig), but 99.9% of hobbyists are flying rinky dink electric quadcopters.

Sounds like those gun nuts in the states "we're hobbyists". Next you're going to say "Drones don't kill people, people kill people".

Or is it "bullets kill people"? Either way, it's not a right to fly a drone, when will you people learn!

[darklord700]

I think they will come out with some drone snapping device to take down illegal drones in the future.

[Cube Inmate]

I'm enjoying flying my new $150 R/C quadcopter indoors today, and I can't wait to fly it around outside my house and neighborhood. If the people with the $2000 semi-autonomous drones start to mess with my right to play with a TOY, I'll be more scroogey than usual.

Stay away from planes.
Stay away from skiers.
Don't take movies of people in private places.

Thank you.